A Lie for a Lie

Posted on by

The “Lawwell Letter” is trending everywhere this week. To elucidate, it is email sent to (among others) Peter Lawwell and Eric Riley of Celtic on 26 July 2012 by SPL CEO Neil Doncaster.

The email came with an attached copy of the Five Way Agreement (hereafter “5WA”, the deal between Sevco, Rangers, the SFA, the SPL and the SFL). Now that it has been made public, it seems safe to speak openly about what it all means for us as folk who believe in sporting integrity.

I would preface my comments with a caveat though. On the face of it, the Celtic Chief Executive appears to have misled the gathering at the recent Celtic AGM. He was asked by a shareholder if Celtic were involved in the Five Way Agreement. Lawwell replied, “No”, and gave same “No” response to the follow up question, “have you seen it?”

Given that a copy of that email was in the possession of a few folk before that AGM, I have to admit to being surprised by that answer – although even more surprised at the apparent lack of due diligence implied by the lack of knowledge of its content.

We have attempted to contact Mr Lawwell to ask him if he would like to comment on the apparent discrepancy between the evidence and his answer (and I am sure we are not the only ones to have done so). To date, we have received no response. Given the complete lack of acknowledgement of the existence of this anomaly in the MSM, we should perhaps assume that none will be forthcoming.

Perhaps there is an explanation (yes I know), but Celtic should know, like Rangers old and new have come to realise, that silence on these matters breeds deep suspicion and distrust.

Assuming for the minute that Occam’s Razor applies here, there may be an uncomfortable truth emerging for Celtic fans – that Rangers (old and new) do not have a monopoly on dishonesty. There is also an uncomfortable truth that should emerge for Rangers fans too – that as we have said all along, this has never been about just Rangers, but about the governance of the game.

If the Celtic CEO did lie to the AGM a few weeks ago what are the consequences? He broke no laws as far as I can see. One insider I spoke to said simply this,

“So he lied. So what? What happens now? It’s irrelevant”

That is of course absolutely true. As long as controlling shareholders are happy that Resolution 12 is buried, and that no deep inquiry into governance is held into the workings of the game in Scotland, the lie is nonpunishable, though it would be a mistake to believe that accountability is confined only to the corporate rules governing Boards and shareholders; the corporate veil of “I was only following company policy” can be readily challenged in the court of public opinion, which has no statute of limitations.

What all this demonstrates of course is that Celtic have been saying one thing to their fans and shareholders, nodding agreement in private meetings about how appalling Rangers behaviour was, tut-tutting over how amateurish the authorities were, and wringing their hands in frustration at what a sham the LNS inquiry turned out to be.

At the same time, they have done nothing, allowed small shareholders to spend not inconsiderable suns progressing the matter, and quietly hoped that the “appetite” for justice would diminish so they could get back to whatever it is they and the rest do when subject to little or no scrutiny.

Whilst ten in a row is on the table of course, they can get away with it. To Celtic fans right now, understandably, nothing else matters. But what if TIAR is derailed? Not a stretch to imagine that the Parkhead kitchen could get uncontrollably hot in that circumstance. And when the TIAR squirrel finally ends its scurry, in either success or failure, where will the fans attention be diverted?

Perhaps the arrogance that permits making (allegedly) false statements to a general meeting, and (allegedly) misleading shareholders over Res 12 is borne of the knowledge that the parachutes are ready to be deployed when either of the above scenarios come to pass? If TIAR is achieved or goes south, are they already prepared for an emergency exit?

Celtic have two major shareholders whose combined holding is over 50% of the club’s shares. Dermot Desmond and Nick Train. Desmond is now in his eighth decade and Train is reportedly having some business difficulties. Both may well be moved to get out anyway, but fan unrest would make their decision a whole lot easier.

And Lawwell himself is – if you believe the MSM – on the wanted list of nearly as many top clubs as Alfredo Morelos.

The foregoing of course is extremely “Old Firm” centric, and as the two biggest clubs in the country they certainly have the biggest impact on the game, culturally, socially and financially. However there is no get-out clause here for others.

We KNOW there is evidence of fraud surrounding the licencing issue in 2012. We KNOW there is evidence of a cover up over that, and the EBT-related registration issues for Old Rangers. We KNOW that the Five Way Agreement was signed by football authorities in the knowledge that it would rob their own rules of judicial authority with regard to compliance by RFC prior to 2012.

We also know that NOT ONE club has taken a meaningful stand against any of it.

Clubs are saying one thing to supporters and doing their best to derail those supporters’ efforts on the other. We can also infer (not unreasonably) that the folk who run the clubs think that we as fans have no right to interfere in how they run their operations.

As I said earlier, Celtic can do what they like whilst TIAR is live, but afterwards, however it ends, the fans and shareholders involved in Res 12 will still be asking questions. Celtic in particular know how fatal it can be to alienate their own fan base – a fan base that has flexed its muscles with devastating effect for the boardroom in the past. And it is the wrath of the fans of all clubs that will eventually see the charlatans get their just desserts.

Our job as fans is to continue to hold those who care little for the honour and beauty of football to account, to continue to press them on their refusal to deal with arguably the biggest sporting scandal in Scottish history.

The bottom line (which is of course what the folk in boardrooms care about) is this. They need us far more than we need them. As fans of different clubs, the sensibility of those of us at SFM recognises that the real battle, the real war, is not between rival fans or rival clubs, but between the arrogant, self-entitled clique who run our game; who lie for fun, who cheat and belittle the sport; and the good folk who make it possible for the game to prosper.

Resolution 12 is not just about Rangers – nor is it just about Celtic. It deserves to be embraced by every true football fan in the country. The Res 12 franchise needs to widened

Sooner or later the fans will demonstrate their unhappiness with the money men. They did it in 2012, and they will inevitably do so again.

This entry was posted in Blogs by Big Pink. Bookmark the permalink.

About Big Pink

Big Pink is John Cole; a former schoolteacher based in the West of Scotland, He is also a print and broadcast journalist who is engaged in the running of SFM . Former gigs include Newstalk 106, the Celtic View, and Channel67. A Celtic fan, he is also the voice of our podcast initiative.

2,251 thoughts on “A Lie for a Lie”


  1. Mr Lucky 3rd April 2020 at 12:52

    '.It runs to 37 pages plus full site plans all for £3.60. They send it to you by email a few minutes after you pay online. I could try and PM you a copy ?'

    $$$$$$$$$$$$

    I woudn't want you to be done for breach of copyright, Mr Lucky. But thank you. 

    I must have completely misread the stuff when I looked at it when Brown was doing his bit, shouting about where's the deeds.

    I'm reasonably happy to accept that TRFC are the Proprietors, because I think that someone long ago would have blown the whistle if there were any real possibility that proprietorship of was debatable.

    If there were any existing charge on the stadium or if there is to be one covering King's loan, we'll find out from Companies House.

     


  2. Mr Lucky 3rd April 2020 at 12:52

    John Clark 3rd April 2020 at 13:44

    ———————————————–

    I have a copy that shows the last update as 25/10/2012.

    The Proprietor is given as Sevco Scotland Limited with an entry date of 14/06/2012, and which was registered a day later.


  3. John Clark 3rd April 2020 at 13:44

    easyJambo 3rd April 2020 at 14:19

    There is a note in Section B Proprietorship which reads “1. The above Company is now known as THE RANGERS FOOTBALL CLUB LIMITED” per the version I downloaded on 02/04/2020. There are no details of when this change took place.


  4. I posted earlier today and my post is ” awaiting moderation ” thats never happened to me before . After reading my post again the only thing I can think on is that I used the words “s**m bags” when referring to EUFA ……… is that a no no ?


  5. It's fast approaching Friday evening… will there be another Ibrox statement issued late tonight?

    And as we are talking about 2012, WRT the stadium…

    It's at times of crisis that you might have to rely on the goodwill you have generated with friends, business partners, etc.

    I would guess there is negligible goodwill today for both the SFA and the SPFL amongst the paying fans – only mistrust and suspicion.  Neither organisation has even remotely tried to address this disconnect with its customers since the shameful events of 2012.

    Obviously, I don't know what working relationship clubs have with Hampden – but I doubt they would regard the governing bodies as professionally run, competent organisations.

    Currently, with this gaping shortage of goodwill towards Hampden, the risk is there could be a disproportionate payback, e.g. with more fans deciding not to return to the shambles that is Scottish football.

    And I've thought over the last couple of weeks that the SFA and SPFL have both wasted a golden opportunity.

    They have literally had Scottish supporters as a captive audience in their own homes – getting cabin fever.

    There could have been daily YouTube videos posted by Maxwell and/or Doncaster.  They might not have been able to say much, but e.g. could have answered some questions from viewers.  At least it would be a step in the right direction and show that the blazers are trying to move with the times.

    They could have produced the videos without even leaving the bunker…


  6. Mr Lucky 3rd April 2020 at 14:33

    There is a note in Section B Proprietorship which reads “1. The above Company is now known as THE RANGERS FOOTBALL CLUB LIMITED” per the version I downloaded on 02/04/2020. There are no details of when this change took place.

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

    Thanks for the info. 

    My copy reads as shown below, with a date of entry and a date of registration. (my file was created on 29/04/2013, so it dates from a few days before that when I was sent the file)

     


  9. Did all the EBT holders pay up their tax due?

    Scottish Football pundits should come clean on whether they have paid all the tax they should have under their EBT schemes. And also acknowledge that a certain club that professes great allegiance to the Crown happily avoided paying tax that should have been funding essential services.


  12. Corrupt official

    is this like,he's been resigned?asking for my mate mark mail


  13. This might just be the time for Scottish football to consider moving to summer competition . Once clearance is given , play out the rest of this season and start next season over the summer months , have the winter break and begin again end of March beginning of April .


  14. easyJambo 3rd April 2020 at 15:12
    My copy reads as shown below, with a date of entry and a date of registration. (my file was created on 29/04/2013, so it dates from a few days before that when I was sent the file)
    …………………………
    So Stockbridge had the deeds in the Drawer all along.
    ……………………………….

    StevieBC 3rd April 2020 at 14:51
    It’s fast approaching Friday evening… will there be another Ibrox statement issued late tonight?
    ……………
    Has it been a week already, how time flies.
    …..
    Obviously, I don’t know what working relationship clubs have with Hampden – but I doubt they would regard the governing bodies as professionally run, competent organisations.
    ……
    At the Craig Whyte court case was it not mentioned it’s run like a Bowling club, or a Bowling club is better run?


  16. tony 3rd April 2020 at 19:00

    '..you think he was pushed?'

    $$$$$$$$$$$$

    He may have been, but 'termination' is the usual word that Companies House use when a director stands down.( I suppose it is none of CH's business why a Director demits office? They just need to have an official note that an individual is no longer a director and the date of termination)

    I don't doubt that the other board members were happy to see him go, even if they didn't vote him off.


  18. tony 3rd April 2020 at 19:00 

    Corrupt official you think he was pushed?

       Dunno mate….

        I know he said he was for the off, and his word means diddly-squat. but I would expect he would be looking for “resigned”, on his C.V. if that was really the case. Terminated sounds a wee bit more like, “Mind your ass on the way oot!”, but I’m not sure of CH terminology….Thought I would ask. 

        It would make a difference regarding internal politics and future decision making though…..

        I think it would be fair to say he could be a dangerous vengeful type, but it might be that he’s completely up Nopaddle creek, and now he’s just the school bully wi’ the bloody nose.

        Maybe Park D’Bus and Ashley have been smoking the peace-pipe.?

        Pure speculation.
    Edit…..Cheers John. Missed your post.


  19. Corrupt official 

    Maybe Park D’Bus and Ashley have been smoking the peace-pipe.?

    as long as king is still a shareholder i don't think that is going to happen,covid-19 won't be helping ashley either so i don't think a guy like him will be ready to play nice when this is all over(virus).pure speculation here too

     


  20. Forgot to add that the reason for starting next season this year is that we'd lose a couple of months to Euro 2021 if we were ro move to summer leagues .


  21. It isn't just King that Ashley is unhappy with , all members of the concert party colluded to undermine Ashley and his placemen on the board , drove down the share price and turned the fan base against them with help from the Press . Park, Letham and Taylor will not be due any favours from Ashley .


  24. Evening folks 

    looking for some help. I have a recollection that the pre SPFL set up had non companies as members ie unincorporated organisations better known as clubs. 
     

    can anyone point me to that info please? And who the clubs were that weren’t companies?


  25. tony 3rd April 2020 at 21:44

    Postponed for a year until 2021 . World Cup in 2022 .


  26. dom16 3rd April 2020 at 21:54

    Evening folks 

    looking for some help. I have a recollection that the pre SPFL set up had non companies as members ie unincorporated organisations better known as clubs. 
     

    can anyone point me to that info please? And who the clubs were that weren’t companies?

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

    @Hirstute Pursuit is your go to man for that.  Brechin City, I believe is/was one.  Annan Athletic may have been another.

    The SPL's articles of association changed in relation to what constituted a club following their 2005 AGM to include the "owner and operator".

    The SFA's articles refer to Club or Association


  29. dom16

    Prior to the creation of the SPL (which  has since been renamed the SPFL) all of the senior leagues in Scotland were run by the Scottish Football League (SFL).

    The SFL's constitution/rules can be found here:

    https://www.scribd.com/document/214043163/SFL-Constitution-Rules

    The SFL was itself an unincorporated association (a non corporate body), whose members were the football clubs which participated in each of its divisions.

    A club's membership of the SFL was similar in many ways to a person's membership of his local bowling club. The clubs had a vote in how the SFL operated; but, (as a non-corporate entity) no-one had true legal ownership of its assets. Heritable property would be vested in its committee members; but, complex commercial contracts (think TV negotiations) would be almost impossible. Committee members hold unlimited liability if things go wrong.

    The SPL was different. Set up as a corporate body, its members were defined as clubs which held a share in the company. Members liability is limited to the value of their shareholding.

    You can find the original articles of association from 1998 here:

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/SC175364/filing-history/ODAyNTYwNjhhZGlxemtjeA/document?format=pdf&download=0

    In the beginning, this worked fine. Each of the top clubs (being corporate bodies) were able to take ownership of a share and therefore part ownership of the league.

    However, a serious problem arose in 2005. The SPL had been advocating/threatening to set up a second division for several years. This would have involved inviting the clubs in the SFL First Division (what was later renamed the Championship) to resign from that league and make up a second tier of the SPL.

    The problem was that Brechin won the Second Division in the 2004/05 season and would potentially be one of those clubs. The reason it was an issue was that Brechin City FC was not (and is still not) incorporated. As an unincorporated association of persons Brechin City FC as of itself has no legal personality and cannot own anything. If one of its committee members was to register the SPL share in his or her name, that person (under the original SPL articles) would be considered to be the club – since only clubs could register a shareholding in the league. Of course, this would have been a nonsense, and so in 2005, the SPL updated its articles to differentiate (when necessary) between the holder of a share and the football club.

    In August of 2005 the SPL members signed off on this:

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/SC175364/filing-history/MTIyNTc3MDU1YWRpcXprY3g/document?format=pdf&download=0

    It is important to note that nothing actually changed in the definition of an association football club.

    Since, in practice, the top clubs are all companies, they can all own and operate themselves.

    But now, with the updated articles, unincorporated Clubs like Brechin -who cannot legally own a share in the SPL/SPFL – can still participate in the league.

    As a related matter, it's worth saying that the SPL's articles had nothing to do with Sevco Scotland's entry into the SFL. This comment from a few years back may be of interest:

    https://sfmarchive.privateland.net/john-clark-meets-the-sfa/comment-page-14/#comment-141551


  30. The problem was that Brechin won the Second Division in the 2004/05 season and would potentially be one of those clubs.
    ……………..
    See that Brechin do they have a levy on themselves for strange football happenings;-)


  31. Just a thought …

    …if a Pools Panel or the like was good enough to decide results of postponed games in the past, why not now to determine outcomes for 2019/20 season (albeit on a larger scale)?


  32. bect67 4th April 2020 at 10:46

    Just a thought … …if a Pools Panel or the like was good enough to decide results of postponed games in the past, why not now to determine outcomes for 2019/20 season (albeit on a larger scale)?

    ______________________-

    Three days late with that one, are you not, bect67?

    The Pools Panel did not decide the results of matches, they did no more than to facilitate the greed of a few football pool companies enabling them to continue making vast profits. They were not required to do anything more than encourage people to continue to chase their dreams of winning a fortune, and it mattered not one jot if they got it right or wrong for everybody knew their own chances of winning that fortune were close to impossible regardless of what the panel came up with.

    To gamble the future of a football club, a business worth millions, on the opinions of a few unqualified 'experts' would be nothing short of crass idiocy, possibly illegal and potentially costing the league millions in litigation. It would probably be fairer, and just as accurate, to toss a coin to decide who won/lost/drew each game.

    Plus, of course, despite Celtic's healthy lead, the league could still be won on a handshake. Remember the infamous result an honourable law lord came up with before suggesting that the SPFL would hunt out four or five honourable men of integrity (with the required football 'expertise') to make hundreds of unbiased decisions.


  33. With apologies for possibly not keeping up to date with events, but you've lost me a bit there AJ – what did they decide?

    And the solution is…?


  34. AJ and Hirsute Pursuit

     

    thanks so much. Very much appreciate your help 


  35. From The Guardian, the relevant para/threat extracted from the UEFA letter to all FA’s;

     

    “Since participation in Uefa club competitions is determined by the sporting result achieved at the end of a full domestic competition, a premature termination would cast doubts about the fulfilment of such condition. Uefa reserves the right to assess the entitlement of clubs to be admitted to the 2020-21 Uefa club competitions, in accordance with the relevant applicable competition regulations.”

     

    The non-top 5 leagues should call out UEFA.  Amongst all the negatives, there could be a positive here.

    Collectively, the ‘smaller’ leagues could try to redress the power imbalance – rather than just roll over for the discredited UEFA.


  37. tony 4th April 2020 at 13:33
    ………….
    I am planning on going out for a meal later.
    It won’t happen as i have no money, but in the meantime i can cry about it and moan about it and let everyone know how unhappy i am about it.
    I may even get some money in by way of a crowd fund (season ticket renewal) if people sympathies with my plight.


  39. “Ibrox sources have told Football Insider that Rangers are firmly against the SPFL forging ahead with calling the season, handing Celtic the title and relegating Hearts.”

    I think I can say with some confidence that Rangers* don’t give a sh*t about Hearts.

    And Rangers* making any kind of comment on something that “impacts upon the integrity of sport in Scotland” is truly ‘people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones’ time!

    Scottish Football would be well rid of a Club that is a permanent embarrassment and an occasional disgrace.


  40. StevieBC

    From what I can see, the UEFA regulations say only that entrants to its competitions must be qualified through "sporting merit". 

    I see no regulations that specify domestic league competitions cannot be curtailed (and results called by whatever means) in these or similarly extraordinary circumstances.

    However,  the sporting merit clause does seem to rule out the opportunity for national associations to nominate clubs for UEFA competitions in 2020/21 if their domestic league is made null and void in 2019/20.

    Simply put, if there is no league results, no club can qualify on sporting merit.

    I think that UEFA is actually saying two things:

    1. If things unexpectedly change and it is subsequently considered that a league could have been completed, it may not recognise the "sporting merit" of a competition that has been, in their view, terminated prematurely.

    2. If a national league does not deliver an outcome for this season, UEFA cannot accept clubs nominated from that association for next season's European campaigns.

    UEFA, will be mindful of its own competitions and we can assume its primary imperative will be to get this season completed and set a timetable for 2020/21.

    If too many national associations call this season "prematurely" it puts UEFA under pressure to do likewise and abandon its own incomplete cup competitions.

    It's not yet ready to do that.


  41. bect67 4th April 2020 at 11:22

    With apologies for possibly not keeping up to date with events, but you've lost me a bit there AJ – what did they decide? And the solution is…?

    _____________

    They decided, solely for the benefit of football coupons, whether a postponed match was a home win, 1 point, an away win, 2 points, or a draw, 3 points. 8 draws = 24 points and your dreams were made. It had absolutely nothing to do with football results and no one with an ounce of sense thought it, in any way, reflected how the results would truly have panned out. If it were at all possible for these 'experts' to come close to predicting the results correctly, I suspect that whenever they were free to do the pools again, they'd have made their fortune quite quickly. They didn't because it was all just eyewash.

    The important thing, though, is that it didn't matter. It didn't matter whether or not they got it right, nearly right, or completely wrong, no one lost out as everyone who paid for the privilege of doing the pools knew, before they paid, that the pools panel would be used if a certain number of matches were postponed and it allowed everyone who got pleasure from marking off their coupon on a Saturday at five o'clock to continue to do so throughout the hardest of winters.

    As to what I think the solution might be, I can only say I don't know, but I do know that whatever it is it has to take account of the financial disaster that's going to befall our game (I think, that like the virus, we've only seen the beginning of the disaster) and to concentrate on saving as many clubs as possible as, if it doesn't, Scottish football as a whole will suffer greatly.

    To be honest, I think we will be very lucky to see football played in our country, and elsewhere, again this year. Obviously I hope I'm wrong, for all our sakes as well as the football, but if I am even just close to being right, a fair number of our clubs are going to go under, especially if the governors continue to pussyfoot around worrying more about not upsetting one of two sets of supporters rather than looking for a solution to what happens next.


  42. Allyjambo 4th April 2020 at 14:29

    ….As to what I think the solution might be, I can only say I don't know, but I do know that whatever it is it has to take account of the financial disaster that's going to befall our game (I think, that like the virus, we've only seen the beginning of the disaster) and to concentrate on saving as many clubs as possible as, if it doesn't, Scottish football as a whole will suffer greatly.

    To be honest, I think we will be very lucky to see football played in our country, and elsewhere, again this year. Obviously I hope I'm wrong, for all our sakes as well as the football, but if I am even just close to being right, a fair number of our clubs are going to go under, especially if the governors continue to pussyfoot around worrying more about not upsetting one of two sets of supporters rather than looking for a solution to what happens next.

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

    Completely agree AJ. Clubs need to have early clarity so that they can get on with their financial planning and resultant actions as letting this run on just produces a cash burn that few are likely able to afford.

    Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.


  43.     Fitba' clubs are forbidden from challenging the law of the land. The law says nae fitba'.   Hospitals are stretched to bursting, and A & E for injured players of poorer clubs is not a morally legitimate option. Changing rooms are not geared to singular occupancy and contact sports breech social distancing guidelines. Who has a 50m dug-out?

        Stand-by ambulances hanging about when people are dying?….C'mon !

        Test-kits are not freely available, and any that may be sourced at over the odds, under the table prices, merit a more worthwhile use than on pampered ballers. Then there are the backroom staff, match officials, cameramen, commentators, electricians and riggers, coach drivers and kit-men, to name but a few.  What, A hunner+ test-kits per game wouldn't be off the mark.

         Its an H & S nightmare !

        Then there is the polis to consider, because dafties will show-up…. Sneakies will be attempted. Hoverers will try to find out results to be first on twitter with it.

        My reading is the league is over, when the league says its over. It has nothing to do with UEFA. It has nothing to do with Sevco, or the Daily Record. 

        And condolences to my Jambo pals, but Hearts have won 4 games all season……4 !……Where do they expect to be?….Mid table?….Top 6? 

        It is what it is. 

         

        


  44. redlichtie 4th April 2020 at 14:10

    “Ibrox sources have told Football Insider.
    …
    I think I can say with some confidence that they don’t even want to put a name to it.


  45. CO. You won't find a Jambo on here denying that Hearts are where they deserve to be, right now, after 30 games. Had the season continued there can be little doubt that they would have been favourites for relegation, but making up 4 points in 8 games is far from impossible and by no means unlikely, but with Celtic supporters trumpeting that they are uncatchable with what most would agree is a pretty unassailable lead, I very much doubt they'd be saying the same thing if TRFC were, in fact, 4 points ahead at this time, laughing their ars*s off at Celtic having to wave 9 in a row goodbye. And TRFC did have the lead at one time, albeit a short time. Imagine if it just so happened that they had that small lead now. Would that be reason enough to crown them champions? Some Celtic fans might say they'd accept that as the right thing to do, but we all know that would not be their true opinion.

    However, regardless of who is in bottom place at the moment it would be financial armageddon for them to face relegation after the ravages of the lost revenue of this season, as it would for each club relegated in the lower divisions. We find ourselves in a worse than extraordinary time with clubs all over Europe having forked out extra cash just a few weeks ago trying to avoid relegation, money they most likely would not have spent if they'd even had a hint of the season being cut short.

    Clubs that are in no danger of relegation will, quite possibly, face administration or worse and there must be a danger of a domino effect in each tier of the SPFL (and other countries' leagues) that could devastate Scottish football.

    It is of little more than a passing interest to the majority of supporters of clubs outside of the New Old Firm bubble whether or not Celtic are handed the league title but what does matter is that their clubs can continue to survive. Not only survive, though, but not fall ever further behind Celtic (we don't know what will happen to TRFC), and to that end I believe the main concern of the SPFL blazers should be the protection of the whole of the league and that that should be their prime concern, well above deciding an argument between just two of their members.

    Something else to bear in mind when saying 'just relegate the bottom club after only 30 of 38 games'. The season started with, and was contracted to include, a relegation/promotion play off. The 3 teams below Dundee Utd surely deserve a chance at what they've earned (as much as Celtic have after only 30 matches) and the team in 2nd bottom spot is as deserving of that tightrope and possible relegation as Hearts are of relegation. If we are going to champion sporting integrity we must surely insist that it is contained in every aspect of the game's competitions.

    Here's a wee thought. If Hearts poor form up to this point is justification for saying they deserve to be relegated now, is there any reason why the far inferior form throughout the season of the 3 Scottish Cup semi-final also-rans shouldn't just lead to Celtic being handed the Cup, too? The principle seems pretty much the same, to me.


  46.    I see your point Ally, but the fact remains it really is what it is. It would be far better to declare the league finito now, and pay out the money, thus assisting club finances. How many could go under waiting an infinite time to receive any form of gate income?. 

        My point was not about who should be awarded a title, but about a realistic approach to the circumstances faced. These are circumstances faced by all clubs regardless of league position. If the league is to be declared over now, it stands to reason that league positions also stand, and purses be paid out on those positions attained over the course. 

        Sevco and Hearts are making the most noise about it, and we both understand they could possibly better their positions, but they come with an "If". 

        But what if "If", doesn't happen?…….What "If" their league positions deteriorate?. …What "If", it leads to an increasing death toll?.

        That's the thing with "If's". 

         Declaring the league over now removes the ifs, and clubs can work, and find solutions towards defined targets…..It will be "Ifs" that cause clubs to go under. 


  48. Allyjambo 4th April 2020 at 16:49

     

    I do not know any Celtic supporters who thinks the club should just be awarded the title.

    Everyone I have spoken to has said they want the league to find a way to play the remaining games. Even if that is later in the year and if it has to be behind closed doors.

    That would not be perfect but it would be better than just finishing the season as it stands.

     


  50. I believe Celtic will have earned the SPFL title despite any curtailment.However the relegation issue is something that does trouble me.The impact of loss of membership from the top flight being far more injurious than finishing a disgruntled second.Hearts to be offered a significant 'parachute' payment might ease Gorgie pain but I understand it will be tough to accept.There is a 14 team league suggestion but the increased number of games in a CVid19 compressed season would be difficult to envisage.So Celtic champions, TRFC 'gracious' runners up and Dundee united replace Hearts, abandon the play off games and a lucky escape yet again for Hamilton.It is not ideal but if football can't recommence before the end of  May then what….?


  51. bordersdon 4th April 2020 at 18:05 

          I know there are a few Celtic fans on here. No doubt some of you will have seen this article by one of your own?

    https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18358189.kevin-mckenna-money-grabbing-celtic-make-ashamed-fan/

           Don't shoot the messenger please!

    —————————————————————-

        I don't think the messenger needs shot BD, and I don't disagree, but there does appear to be a glass ceiling wrt who should contribute/sacrifice more. I lifted this extract for example……

    "What contributes more to the government, the NHS/police…etc….. A PL player taking a pay cut that stays with the clubs owners or paying more than 45% tax through PAYE on a large salary which goes directly to the government?.. Let’s take a look at the average PL player- £3m a year…£1.4m goes directly to tax Let’s cut the wage by 80%- £600,000 a year…£270,000 goes to tax Now x500 players £1.4m = £700,000,000m in tax £270,000 = £135,000,000m in tax Which one is preferred? How about the government asks certain people who own airlines and are worth billions to start paying tax, or the sportspeople who are tax exiles. Now what about bankers?"

    http://etims.net/?p=15489 

        Reports vary regarding quantities, but there are a minimum of 54 billionaires in the UK, (probably more). Would they even notice a 50% one off tax to help out in what is a disease which may directly affect them?. 

        It could reasonably be argued that they will soon have it back again when/if this situation passes. 

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/oliverwilliams1/2019/11/20/exactly-how-many-billionaires-are-there-in-the-uk/#3c9589119b75

         What cannot be argued is that a one-off supertax on the uber wealthy would raise more money for the government in the fight, whilst cutting players wages actually deprives the govt, but does leave money in the clubs,…… coincidentally owned by the uber wealthy. 


  52. bordersdon 4th April 2020 at 18:05

    I read that piece earlier today and agree with Kevin Mckenna’s highlighting the hipocrosy of claiming to be a club like no other and not echoing the sentiment of the majority of fans when it comes to issues such as the living wage. The trust has performed with credit in trying financial times as has the much maligned green brigade but the board seem to consistently miss the point when it comes to protecting what is now becoming an embarrassing aspiration rather than a determined ethical stance. The professional club are by no means the only concern perceived to be taking advantage of troubled times and indeed why should they be pilloried for having the foresight to husband resources carefully? It’s because the fan base and support worldwide expect better of them.

     


  53. gunnerb 4th April 2020 at 18:49

    I believe Celtic will have earned the SPFL title despite any curtailment.However the relegation issue is something that does trouble me.The impact of loss of membership from the top flight being far more injurious than finishing a disgruntled second.Hearts to be offered a significant ‘parachute’ payment might ease Gorgie pain but I understand it will be tough to accept.There is a 14 team league suggestion but the increased number of games in a CVid19 compressed season would be difficult to envisage.So Celtic champions, TRFC ‘gracious’ runners up and Dundee united replace Hearts, abandon the play off games and a lucky escape yet again for Hamilton.It is not ideal but if football can’t recommence before the end of  May then what….?

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

    I don’t disagree with much of that. The biggest issue for next season is when it can start. A 14 team league actually offers some flexibility, as you can work with a split to adjust the number of games played from 26 to 40, depending on whether you just play everyone twice, split 7/7 with a third game (32) or with home & away to give four games (40).  The split could equally be 6/8.  Extra home games, if they can be scheduled, might give clubs a much needed financial boost.

    However, if as Aberdeen chairman Dave Cormack suggested on Sportsound, there is a possibility of no football being played in front of a paying crowd before Christmas, then who knows how clubs will manage. I don’t see live streaming of games behind a paywall making up the shortfall.

     


  55. If we are unable to play the remaining games I believe a 14 team top division is the way to go.

    Indeed if there are 42 teams the 3 divisions of 14 may be the way to go.

    I haven't really thought it through though, can anyone maybe enlighten me on how that would be problematic. 


  56. Homunculus 4th April 2020 at 22:01

    '….I haven't really thought it through though, can anyone maybe enlighten me..'

    $$$$$$$$$$$$$

    I am not knowledgeable enough in the matter of league reconstruction to be able to offer any informed view of the mechanics by which Scottish Football might address the problem caused by the coronavirus.

    What I do believe, though, is that we have a governance body that abandoned any notion of sporting integrity in 2012, and perhaps a decade before then. 

    It is therefore quite likely that anything they were now to decide will be heavily influenced not by any principle, but by the factors that most influenced them in 2012.

    If there is still a 'Scottish Football' when the coronavirus is finally defeated, the lie at the heart of it will still be there, and will still need to be dealt with.

    TRFC is not, of course, the cause of the pandemic. 

    But if it survives both its antecedent finance problems and the covid-19 problems, it will still have to be declared as NOT being RFC  of 1872, and therefore not entitled to trade on that club's record of legitimate sporting achievement, before sporting truth and honour can be restored to our Sport, and to the Governance of our Sport.

    In no way does Covid-19  mean we forget the cheating of SDM, the death by Liquidation of RFC of 1872, the Res 12 issue, or the 5-Way Agreement and the continuing propagation of the untruth that TRFC are the historic Rangers. 

    In no way whatsoever!

     


  57. A 14 club league with 26 H and A ties followed by a 7/7 split and 12 H and A ties gives a 38 game season with no excess home or away tie issues 


  58. There is no way out of this as every team chasing the title or fighting relegation etc has a valid point as to how the league should / shouldnt end. As much as I wanted 9IAR  it all pales into insignificance when you look at the bigger picture.  All clubs right now should be knocking their heads together as to how we can best come through this . We should be in survival mode , nothing else . From what ive been reading about this terrible virus around the globe IMHO I really dont see any football being played here or any where in Europe until very late in the year or not in this year at all. Personally I would like to see the season played out to a finish but by the time that comes round we could realistically have lost a few teams in all our leagues , so maybe that is impossible too. I think all the domestic leagues in Europe need to take the elephant out the room i.e Tell EUFA to do one and concentrate on fixing their own domestic leagues before we even think about European football.


  59. If a team like Aberdeen can avoid relegation due to stadium criteria issues at another club then surely relegation can be suspended for one season when the consequences otherwise could be the straw that breaks the camel's back and the relegated clubs falling into administration?

    This is not a situation where a club has cheated and failed to pay taxes, then going into administration (and liquidation) – the existential threat has come from outwith football through no fault of the clubs.

    Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.


  61. And nae interims either. Doubt if they will ever be published.

    Scottish Football needs on the ball authorities.


  62. It will only take one club in the top flight to go into administration because of this situation and the league will not be able to begin again, how could it.
    A club looking for a top six place or european place could be facing a club decemated by Administration due to no fault of their own.
    Even if one club goes into administration during the lock down and say the season starts back up, one or two games are played then another club goes into administration during this period, what then?
    Before there is even talk of the leagues starting up again finances of all clubs have to be looked at and clubs have to give a cast iron guarantee they can see out an end to this prolonged season, if they can’t the season is finished and decision of a start up is taken out of the SPLFs hands altogether, how could they start up the rest of the season without these guarantees?


  63. Cluster One 5th April 2020 at 11:27 https://twitter.com/ClusterOne2/status/1213802694470782976/photo/1

    Another month of silence from the SFA.

    ========

    Hmmm…

    What is the purpose of this article?

    It offers absolutely nothing new: no quotes, no new information.

    Is it just deflection away from the SFA sitting on their hands re: UEFA – by pushing the ongoing story about the SFA sitting on their hands re: the Rangers' Euro licence?

    …or is it the new TRFC 'PR expert', erm, stirring up something out of nothing for another purpose?


  64. redlichtie 5th April 2020 at 11:39

    And nae interims either…

    =====

    Well that's not really RIFC's fault redlichtie…

    King has sloped off back to SA, and – obviously – he still has that fag packet – with the interims scribbled on it – on his person.

    Have to cut the MD Robertson, (a genuine, qualified accountant unlike King), some slack here.

    Mibbees.  enlightened

     


  65. To be fair TRFC may have provided the SFA with the financial information (interims) required to satisfy any licencing requirements.

    As EJ (I think) pointed out, there was no need for them to be publishing interims anyway. I suggested they may have been doing so in order to maintain the illusion of normality after having been forced to de-list as no NOMAD would work with them. Which is a requirement on the AIM market.

    So, we don't actually know if they have given the SFA what was needed. I'm sure if they haven't the SFA won't consider their application.


  66. Allegedly, the Scottish Chief Medical Officer has been resigned,

    and she will shortly be taking up her new post as the SFA spokesperson.

    mail


  67. Certainly off topic but classic "do as I say but not as I do".


  68. Homunculus 5th April 2020 at 13:41

    So, we don’t actually know if they have given the SFA what was needed. I’m sure if they haven’t the SFA won’t consider their application.

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

    The trouble is it appears to be nothing other than a exercise. 2011 is well known, but last year a set of interims were proclaimed which appeared quite absurd, and were pretty much confirmed as such as soon as a set of accounts checked by an Auditor had to be produced. In my opinion, a scribbled note to the SFA saying “aye…we’re daein fine” would be enough to get them a licence. Other than Administration and Liquidation in 2012, I can’t envisage ANY circumstance where the SFA would refuse them a licence. 


  69. upthehoops 5th April 2020 at 20:01

    '..a scribbled note to the SFA saying “aye…we’re daein fine” '

    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$

    A scribbled note,UTH? Surely not!

    Lord bless us and save us this night and day, what a world it would be if the  quiet spoken word of an Ibrox director to a friend on the SFA board was not to be treated as his bond! 

    Besides, who can be bothered with emails, phone calls and text messages that nosey folk can get their hands on?

     


  70. The problem with the SFA  passing interims that are obviously false occurs if said club has an insolvency event during their participation in a uefa tournament . There are rumours in Blogland that a certain club* is not up to date with its taxes and as a consequence cannot avail themselves of the furlough  scheme to help with wages. If that is the case I have to wonder why they would go ahead and pay the March wage bill . I get that if they didn't it is effectively game over and all that investment is gone forever with zero chance of getting it back . Last time around it was the bill from HMRC that floored them as Hector refuses to take pennies on the £ for taxes due . This time it will probably be the football debts that will fail any deal and if they have been dodging the taxman again then the odds are getting higher for a favourable outcome. If the leopard that is King doesn't change his spots then he will also vote against a CVA and the games a bogey. It looks like Park and Co have delayed any bills they can (including tax) just to keep them afloat in the slim hope that a last minute buyer will step in to rescue them . 22m in transfers due , 10m shortfall, 13m to buy out King , SDI compensation , 5m loan to King, 3-4 m for Close ,Memorial walls 1.3m, Hummel/Elite compensation, no kit deal and possibly no European football for next season . No wonder Traynor and King got out of Dodge when they could .


  72. gerrybhoy67 5th April 2020 at 21:30

    An update from Phil  

    https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2020/04/05/pesky-rules-and-ibrox-clubs/#more-16279

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

    Under the current SPFL rules, any club with tax arrears has 28 days from a tax liability becoming due to pay it in full. If the bill is not paid in full, then it becomes a “Default Event”. That default must then be reported to the SPFL within 2 days.

    The relevant rules are:
    E20 Subject to Rules E21 and E28, any Club which:
    E20.2 does not within twenty-eight days of a Tax Liability becoming due by the Club on or after 1 June 2014 pay to HMRC the full amount of that Tax Liability;
    E20.4 does not within twenty-eight days of the date of an assessment issued by HMRC on or after 1 June 2014 pay to HMRC the full amount of the Club’s Tax Liabilities arising as a result of that assessment; and/or
    E20.5 defaults on the terms of any Time to Pay Agreement;

    (each a “Default Event”) shall report each such Default Event in writing to the Secretary within 2 days of the Default Event arising.


  73. Timtim 5th April 2020 at 21:17

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

    Can anyone confirm that a businesses tax affairs have to be up to date in order to apply for Job Retention Scheme payments, I haven't actually seen that anywhere.

    I know for example that HMRC are allowing deferment of VAT payments which are due and are pretty much guaranteeing time to pay if people really need it. Well that's the impression I am getting. I think they see getting people paid as the priority just now and will deal with anything else later.

    I'm not saying the tax thing isn't right I just haven't seen it anywhere.


  74. Don’t know if anyone heard Sportsound this afternoon.  Amongst a decent discussion about Coronavirus, impact on leagues etc Neil McCann was asked to give his best 11 played with, as a fore runner to BBC showing the 2002 (?) cup final tonight as part of their series of showing past games.  
     

    Now, as expected, McCanns 11 were entirely Rangers and, I think, entirely EBT funded (I’m sure someone in twitter land will have done the calculation already no doubt, hopefully, complete with an objective comparison to how many nurses or ventilators said first 11 cost us all now).  If one could get past that minor trifling point and it appeared contributors Young and English certainly could (lots of ooos and aaaaas and “how good was Scottish football then?”) it was actually a decent listen – a good insight into what the make up of a winning side was.

     

    but I did smile at one point (bearing in mind EBTs were clearly subjecto-non-grata).  On discussing Claudio Cannigia, his skill, character, World Cup medal and honourable mention in Maradona’s book Neil breathlessly exclaimed “I mean this guy with this pedigree came to us from Dundee.  I mean how on earth could THEY afford him?”

     

    if irony could be bottled, Neil would clearly need a warehouse.


  75. Homunculus 5th April 2020 at 22:05

    '…I'm not saying the tax thing isn't right I just haven't seen it anywhere.

    $$$$$$$$$$$$$

    Nor have I found that that is a stated condition of eligibility to claim , in the Gov.uk guidance for employers on the job retention scheme 

    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/claim-for-wage-costs-through-the-coronavirus-job-retention-scheme#who-can-claim

    However, if RIFC move smartly and appoint an Administrator……..they could be covered by this:

    "Administrators

    Where a company is being taken under the management of an administrator, the administrator will be able to access the Job Retention Scheme. However, we would expect an administrator would only access the scheme if there is a reasonable likelihood of rehiring the workers. For instance, this could be as a result of an administration and pursuit of a sale of the business"

Leave a Reply