Beware the angry Shareholders — they might just demand an answer!


ForresDee says: (129) November 21, 2013 at 5:44 pm …

Comment on Beware the angry Shareholders — they might just demand an answer! by Auldheid.

ForresDee says: (129)

November 21, 2013 at 5:44 pm



Rate This


Shooperb says: (329)
November 21, 2013 at 5:37 pm

Not worth getting excited about. If they have half a brain, they’ll stump up (assuming they haven’t run out of cash, obviously), simply because it bolsters their ‘same club’ charade, and, as pointed out earlier, if it’s settled before the appeal over the BTC is heard, then it gives both the SPFL and TRFC room to claim that they’ve ‘already been punished’ in the event of the conclusion actually being the one that every reasonable person would draw from the EBT scheme, and that the case against Rangers (the old club, obviously) can’t be revisited by the authorities.


And that is the whole story in a nutshell, same club, been punished, closed chapter, nothing to see move along!
There may be something in this in that I believe there is a fundamental flaw in LNS’s decision and the last thing the SPFL might want is to have to revisit it and raise the title stripping issue that LNS got around by deeming all ebts as regular and the failure to report them as administrative rather than deliberate errors.

The wtc ebts history challenges this view and indeed suggests the matter should have been looked at under a different set of SPL/SFA rules entirely about making illegal payments by hidden means.

Lets assume the FTT had found for HMRC before LNS started. That is Rangers had paid players by an unlawful method not available to other clubs and hidden details of the unlawful payments from the SFA. Anyone any idea what Articles that might have breached?

Auldheid Also Commented

Beware the angry Shareholders — they might just demand an answer!
RyanGosling says: (97)

November 21, 2013 at 11:16 am

Resin lab dog, to respond to your post:

Its hard to argue with a lot of what you said, and while I’d happily get into some of the nuances I don’t want to detract from the direction of the blog – happy to pick up with you via pm if you wish.

What I will say in response to your direct question, “was it worth it”, I will repeat what I’ve said on here previously. I wish Rangers had never even contemplated the tax dodging policies they used. I wholeheartedly wish it had never happened. And if you look at what has happened specifically to Rangers since then (liquidated), then the only possible conclusion that no, it was not worth it.

And for the little its worth, I regret and am sorry for the fallout caused by the actions of Rangers over the last decade and a half.

Actually, if I write that and leave it at that someone will be straight back on asking if I’m also sorry for the sectarian employment policies of the past, so yes, I am appalled by that disgusting policy.

I posted yesterday that one of the major issues that stops football moving on is that in embarking on a course of ebts that required side letters to be hidden, Rangers, broke the trust on which much of the game’s governance is based.

It is apparent that there is a deal of reliance on self certification underpinning SFA rules. (As an aside the UEFA licence process is a self certifying one apparently which history will show an untrustworthy Rangers under CW drove a bus through after gaining a licence in 2011, although the SFA had a duty to check for veracity)

Rangers in embarking on ebts with hidden letters broke the trust with the SFA and with the rest of Scottish football and that broken trust continues to bedevil all attempts to move on. As I said yesterday why should an apparently uncorrected entity be allowed to carry on playing as if they were trustworthy when clearly they are not?

However on thinking things through further the Rangers support are part of the Scottish game and so when Sir David Murray and Campbell Ogilvie embarked on a policy of tax evasion (for sure in the wtc and probably in the btc) they also broke a trust with Ranger’s supporters by taking your club of which they were custodians, into the shameful territory that you now occupy and which you are having to apologise for.

Yet there is little or no mention of this factor in the media, indeed it seems that the last thing anyone on the establishment side of the house wants to come out is that SDM and CO betrayed the Rangers support and broke trust with them. We and you are being asked to believe nothing irregular took place

That is not surprising given that SDM is still a “Sir” and CO is President of the SFA, so you do not get much more establishment than that. Now SDM has gone to ground but the man equally responsible for starting EBTs, the ones that are illegal because of the way they were implemented, but which LNS confused with (loan) ebts that are still under judgement with huge consequences that have still to be realised never mind felt, that man Campbell Ogilvie is still President of the football governing body in Scotland. Make no mistake he was instrumental in taking Rangers on the ebt trail in 1999 but has hidden behind the loan ebts of which he has protested little knowledge.

Good Rangers men. like yourself should be asking questions of Campbell Ogilvie and his role in introducing the risky and trust breaking ebt culture into Rangers.

If trust is to be restored to our game, the untrustworthy must be removed and the process starts with Campbell Ogilvie. He either satisfactorily explains to Rangers supporters his innocence when he signed the first ebt letter in Sep1999 and his part in the Rangers employee remuneration policy ratifying committee a few weeks after that first letter and to you and the rest of Scottish football why he failed to alert LNS to the significance of the early ebts in 1999 and 2000 (the ones the SPL missed because D&P withheld details) when he gave testimony to LNS.

If he has a credible explanation, which by being credible would restore trust, he stays. If no credible explanation or none at all, Rangers supporters should be demanding he step down as one of the men responsible for taking you and your club (and our game) to where it now is and breaking trust with you.

If we want a clean game then the guilty need to come clean and as arguably the biggest victims of broken trust in terms of all that you have had to endure as a result of that brokenness, it is high time the Rangers support focussed on why you are now where you are and who really betrayed you.

Beware the angry Shareholders — they might just demand an answer!
Resin_lab_dog says: (260)

November 21, 2013 at 1:38 am



Rate This


Auldheid says: (1024)
November 20, 2013 at 11:22 pm



Rate This


Auldheid you have summed this up beautifully.
As a non glasgow fan with no axe to grind, I feel I have been ‘cheated’ by the ref blatantly and repeatedly with video evidence and no redress to the extent that the ref has donned the shirt of the guy who brought me down in the box, while others in the field of play have cheated repeatedly with impunity.

I have no axe to grind with the decent bears (that means you Ryan)… I just want someone to blow the whislte on their clubs (plural) more flagrant breaches every now and again. Otherwise what is the point? What was a great sport has decended into a comical farce, because of the wilful failure of governance in the face of repeated and flagrant breaches of rules and sportsmanship from – as it turn out – a single entity – apparently : (except when it comes to trifles like paying for what you owe or have consumed!)

Who can blame Ryan and his compadres?
If the guy is clear on goal and you bring him down with a clear 2 footed challenge that is nowhere near the ball in clear view of the ref and he waves play on, your fans will cheer. And next time the cheat will be even less circumspect when chopping down honest endeavour with foul play.
And about then the sporting contest ends.

It was OK while it lasted.
But the sport of football in Scotland is now over.

My money would be on the guy in the tights in the mask, but it loses its attraction even as a betting circus. There is no point becaue – sooner or later – it’s all rigged.

So Ryan, you got your wish. Your club, it seems, was saved after all. I wish you the pleasure of it.

Because the cost was our whole sport and the pleasure it brought through honest endeavour to generations.
Quality father & son time is important, especially in this day and age.
So I will take my son down the snooker hall this Saturday.

Tell me Ryan … was it worth it?
(… it wasn’t your fault, though – I wouldn’t make a decentguy like you shoulder that burden)

But… Cheats then. Cheats now. Cheats forever.
Can I ask one thing of you and any other readers who feel as you do, particularly of teams other than Celtic or RIFC.

Please write to your club chairperson and tell him/her why you feel as you do and ask him/her to then send your letter to the SFA President to tell him the impact that the SFA’s on going policy of opaqueness and obfuscation with regard to RIFC is having on your club’s supporters. Ask your chairperson to remind the SFA President of the great play they made of transparency which provides clarity and why there has been none.

Just one letter to each club from a genuinely aggrieved supporter could make a difference.

Beware the angry Shareholders — they might just demand an answer!
Although the oldco/newco debate is tiresome to some, the fact it continues unabated, ready to surface at the merest jibe suggest it has an importance way beyond what makes it tiresome.

If I can suggest what that might be.

There is a school of thought held by most non RIFC fans that Rangers cheated the rest of Scottish football when they embarked on the ebt route by which they broke the trust on which rules and sporting integrity depend and that the punishment for such a crime should be that their history ended when they were put into liquidation.

The insistence that it did not is seen by the rest of the game as a denial of the seriousness not only of what was done in the past but more important their ongoing attempts to avoid admission of and consequences of their cheating ever since the ebt story became public.

The difficulty this causes the rest is why should a club/organisation/entity that broke trust and cheated yet acts as if it had not, be allowed to compete against other clubs who have acted in a trustworthy manner?

There may have been apologies but the general narrative encouraged by the faulty LNS judgement is that all Rangers did was make clerical errors in registering players. This is bullshit. They embarked on a remuneration policy from Sept 1999, with the full knowledge of the existing SFA President Campbell Ogilvie, that was illegal in the way that it was followed. What made it illegal was using side letters, and they knew so or would not have hidden their existence and have admitted them when HMRC asked for sight of them in 2005.

This admission of guilt at cheating and breaking of trust is the huge hurdle that the Rangers camp are refusing to face and the desire/insistence to cling to their sporting history is indicative of their reluctance.

We already know that DOS EBTs were operated in such an incorrect manner as to make their use illegal and had the FTT found for HMRC in the loan ebts, cheating would have been the inevitable conclusion on them. If the UTT reverse the FTT, the conclusion that Rangers cheated and broke trust is one that no one can avoid and the way should be being prepared now for such an eventuality and what will be to them, an unpalatable truth.
Surely this is wise rather than to keep pretending the game is dealing with a minor misdemeanour which is how LNS portrayed it.

The other factor that keeps the debate alive is that if they retain their history and identity then there is no deterrent value in the existing rules, which makes the rules disreputable, not those who jibe at them.

UEFA Article 12 is UEFA’s attempt at a deterrent to a club dodging debt via liquidation and the SFA must introduce a deterrent element into their own Articles. Whether the UTT decision or a fuller understanding of what went on with DOS forces the issue, it is clear that the SFA Articles must include a provision similar to UEFA’s Art 12 in order to protect the integrity of our game.

If you read Article 12 you will see that its purpose is to protect the integrity of UEFA competition. If it is good enough for UEFA it should be good enough for the SFA.

What I would suggest is that any senior professional club who are liquidated may be allowed back into the professional game but cannot return to the tier at which they exited until three years have elapsed. That three years gives the club an opportunity to prove to the rest of the game that it has learned the lesson from its behaviour and is ready to join the rest of the footballing community as a partner untainted by its past behaviour if it is granted a licence in each of the three years.

The retention of sporting history would not be a given but dependent on behaviour in the three year period, Call it a probation period.

I believe it is the lack of admission of wrong doing and no correction policy that will keep this harmful debate going, and when I say harmful I mean to everyone.

However we cannot get such an honest approach whilst the SFA act as if trust was not broken when they, more than any other party, know that it was.

Recent Comments by Auldheid

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
The allegations on CQN that Bobby Madden has a gambling problem surely require his  removal from the the firing line until the allegators are proved wrong.
No snap decisions, just a leisurely swim until there is no question as to his motivations. 

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Dons/Hibees/Jambos and any other club wanting a UEFA spot.
Flogging players who have put TRFC near top of league is an admission those players unaffordable.
The solution is to make a licence for TRFC conditional on a realistic sustainable business plan. SFA are not doing their licencing job. Never have in fact.
So what questions are your club Directors asking the SFA?
Why not get them to ask UEFA if they are happy with the way SFA process licence applications from Ibrox. Seems UEFA not happy.
Proper club licencing can level the playing field a bit but it also protects all clubs from charlatans selling jam tomorrow.

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Allyjambo 21.41

Matthew Lindsay: Time for Dave King to depart Rangers – but who could take over at the Ibrox club?

Rangers need to be run by individuals whose integrity is beyond doubt.
Do such individuals steeped in blue exist?

As rare as a dodo nesting on an iceberg in Carlisle Bay, Barbados.
” No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.” Albert Einstein

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
I got my electronic copy of Not The View delivered yesterday.
Browsing through I thought I recognised The Christmas Tale offering and was pleased to read it as I had forgotten it was a tale I told at Christmas in 2012 (on CQN I think).
I think it worth repeating as a reminder of why SFM exists – because we love football and we love Scottish football and we aren’t done yet.
See me?
See me?
Ah jist luv fitbaw.
Its funny cos I was never that interested until about age eleven when a good pal, who was destined never to see his 21st birthday after a car crash in Rome encouraged me to try it. John was there to become a priest but got fast tracked by the Big Man who knows a good guy when he sees wan.
John encouraged me to give it a go in Suffolk St.  We played “croassies in” with the metal pull down blinds that formed the gates to the interior of the Barras as goals. Plastic baws, Fridos then Wembleys, arrived about then and many a red hot poker made the game a bogey in a failed attempt at repairing a burst baw.
(I blame the whelk shells; they were aw ower the place from the Oyster Bar in the Gallowgate (where I was entrapped in the cellar two weekends in a row cleaning whelks and mussels) and the ravenous appetite of the Glasgow punter for shellfish.
I played fitbaw morning, noon and night and saw Glasgow Green pitches UPGRADED from black ash/clinker to red blaze. We thought we were Wullie Fernie playing on that stuff and there was a case for playing with 10 baws as teams were filled with tanner baw players (goalies were just last man standing) for whom the object of the game was to beat everybody else in the opposition before scoring or it wisnae a goal.
I remember wan night  at the Glasgow Green waiting to play for St Alphonsus v Our Lady of Fatima  when I saw Tony Green, who was a Mungo boy and went on to play for Newcastle and Scotland before injury ended his career too early, waiting, sannies under his arm, to get a game with any team who were a man short. I think the OLOF manager mugged wan of his boys as Tony appeared for them and turned a virtuoso performance against us to give OLOF a 3-2 victory.
I started work and went to London for a year to work in the old Post Office Savings Bank. In my first week Jock (a Jock) approached and asked if I played. He never mentioned the sport, he didnae hiv tae, we wur already communicating at the spiritual level only fitbaw lovers can reach (the kind of thing that electrifies CP on CL nights.)
I get directions fur a game oan the Saturday at Acton Town and turn up, new Puma boots, paid by my transfer grant, under my arm (nae sannies fur me) On entering the park ahm puzzled, there wiz GRASS everywhere, nae clinker or red blaze in sight.  “Must be roon the back of the dressing rooms “ I remember thinking.
Anyhoo I gets changed runs roon the back to see — MAIR grass as far as the eye can see. So I troop back tae the dressing rooms to get directions to the ash pitches. When I explain what ah wiz used to playin oan they aw jist looked at me like my village wiz searching fur their idiot.
Well I get sorted out and line up. The baw, I remember, wiz a size 5 orange wan, but no wan o they bricks wi laces. The first pass to me wiz high and ah chests the ball doon and whirls roon afore I get studded from the back as wiz the custom oan the narrow pitches of Glasgow Green. To ma amazement the nearest opponent to me is about 4 yards away. As I look into his eyes I smile and turn to Jock at the sidelines and shout.
“Yer gonnae need anither baw” as I meander off in pursuit of the only goal that counted for a tanner baw man. I think I managed 7 before netting and I’ll take that. It wiz oan unfamiliar grass after all.
 Postscript “Aye very guid Auldheid” yer thinking (if you have stayed with me so far.)
“Nice reminiscing and it is Christmas Eve, so thanks fur the memories. “
But there’s mer tae this tale fur
See me?
See me?
I jist luv fitbaw.
Its ma game, its  OOR game and when I see the mess those responsible for looking after its welfare have made of it ah want to do something.
I hope ahm not alone.
Dec 2012

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
That Dave King is allowed any influence in Scottiish football is a dereliction of the duty of the SFA to protect our game from criminality.

Dave King should be called to account by the other clubs via the SFA to provide evidence he can do what he has promised, which is bank roll TRFC.

At the very least the clubs should be preparing for another insolvency event at Ibrox and deciding the conditions they will set for TRFC to continue taking part in Scottish football on the same basis as every other club, who act with the utmost good faith to fellow members.

The clubs via the SFA have the powers under Club Licensing to do so, powers that the SFA Comp Off can only conclude the SFA have failed to utilise. Powers that UEFA must have recognised by now as a result of Res12 letter of May 2016 and UEFA Licence submission this year, are not being used fully by the SFA.  

It was self preservation that underpinned the 5 Way Agreement . The dangers of that agreement – destroying integrity, undermining trust, ignoring deceit – become more and more manifest and should alert other clubs to the necessity to exercise their collective responsibility to each other and so to our game that they govern via the SFA on our behalf, using Club Licensing powers.

When a particular course of action designed to preserve self is not working it is human nature to try another course.

Not renewing STs come April/May unless positive trust restoring actions are taken by our clubs collectively, is one way of changing minds about what is self preserving.

About the author