Good Evening,
Whilst it is understandable that the continuing events at Ibrox remain a hot topic among all Scottish Football Fans — especially given the views of some sections of the press on such events– the never ending rush down the marble staircase is certainly not the only show in town.
The other morning we were treated to the “scoop” that Alistair Johnstone is afraid that Craig Whyte– the once proclaimed Multi Billionaire from Motherwell- may well still be pulling all the strings at Ibrox! This is a fear which is shared by those who walk the corridors of Hampden Park as they, too, are terrified of the prospect of Whyte returning in some shape or form and coming back to haunt them, especially as he has been deemed unfit and proper, banned sine die, and generally ridiculed for his past actions.
However, the Hampden jackets know fine well that their realm only stretches so far and that if by means of the proper application of company law, contract or some other piece of paper Whyte controls the shareholding of the self proclaimed “parent company” to the football club then they are in a fix. In fact, I will wager that they just would not know how to deal with such a situation as after all RIFC PLC neither holds a licence to play football nor is a member of the SFA and so, on the face of it, who owns it has nothing to do with them.
At this juncture, no one in authority knows who Blue Pitch Holdings are and, strangely, no one in authority knows who Margarita Holdings are either! Yet these two “holdings” whoever they may be, may well hold all the power down Govan way…… with the SFA completely powerless to find out who they are let alone get into any dialogue with them. All the SFA can do is talk to the appointed Directors and officers of The Rangers Football Club Ltd.
This, is a most unsatisfactory state of affairs.
Meanwhile, they will have no difficulty in finding out who the new shareholders of Dunfermline Athletic are. Those shareholders will come from the fanbase and will be clearly registered at Companies House, with the result that ultimately those fans/shareholders will appoint Directors who will then attend meetings and speak and opine on their behalf and in essence be the ” Voice of Dunfermline” at Hampden.
Perhaps, similar will follow from Heart of Midlothian?
However, those at Hampden — if they have any sense at all– will be most wary of events happening in the east end of Glasgow come November.
In the middle of the month, Celtic PLC will hold its AGM and amidst the items on the agenda is the fan driven notion that the Club— through its Directors—- should go further in holding the SFA to account and enquire into the granting of club licences, and in particular how it granted Rangers a club licence that allowed entry to the Champions League in 2011 when the small tax case was outstanding.
The Celtic board have deemed this motion as “Unnecessary” and in support of that contention have released documentation showing that they raised this very issue with the SFA on behalf of the shareholders and fans. Further– and here is the rub— The Directors reveal that they were not satisfied with the SFA response and have disclosed that they took the matter further and wrote to UEFA.
Ultimately, UEFA also provided a reply, which backed the SFA approach and which Celtic had little option but to accept in the absence of admissible contradicting evidence..
It is on this basis, that Peter Lawell and Co say the AGM motion is not necessary. Note that saying that the motion is not necessary, is not at all the same thing as saying that what the motion seeks to achieve is not necessary or does not have the support of the board!
There will be those at Hampden who severely hope that the Celtic Board are successful in voting this measure down as obviously they deem their original reply sufficient and would like to end the discussion there.
However, my own view, is that whether the motion is successful or not, there are those within the SFA who will recognise there is trouble staring them in the face here. Real Trouble!
Let’s recap for a moment and draw some threads together.
Celtic’s past Chairman, Dr John Reid, said only a couple of years ago that the SFA was clearly not fit for purpose. He did so in the context of events surrounding Neil Lennon and other matters, but was unshakably robust in his condemnation of an institutionalised uselessness which he saw pervaded the Hampden ranks.
Prior to that, Henry McLeish produced a report which stated that he too had concerns about the Governance of Scottish Football and called for openness and transparency.
In the intervening period, we have seen Mr David Longmuir, former Chief Executive of the Scottish Football League, find himelf without a position following reconstruction– and this partly as a result of club chairmen being apparently kept in the dark about his payment, bonuses and expenes. I understand that there was considerable anger from some at the way in which they had been treated by Mr Longmuir.
Then there is Mr Campbell Ogilvie, El Presidente, who himself benefited from a Rangers EBT and who held sway at Ibrox during a period of time when Rangers– by their own admission— made unlawful and illegal payments to three high profile players in breach of tax laws and SFA/SPL rules. It is these breaches and the consequent Wee Tax Bill which has caused all the angst among Celtic fans and has lead to the highly regulated legal step of tabling a motion at the club’s AGM.
Basically, the position seems to be, that as at the due date when the appropriate documents and declarations were made for a Euro Licence by Rangers for 2011, the wee tax bill was outstanding and due. If it was overdue, then the SFA could not and should not have granted them a licence……. and potentially Celtic should then have been put forward as Scotland’s representatives in the Champion’s League.
However, that did not happen, and Ranger’s were granted a licence– something that the Celtic Directors clearly felt was not correct.
They may have disagreed with the awarding of the licence because there were those at Rangers at the time who declared that a payment to account had been made to the tax office– allegedly £500,000– and that they had entered into an agreement to make payment of the balance by instalments. Had that been so, then all would have been hunky dory and no more would have been said.
Alas, however, no such payment appears to have been made at all, and no such agreement was entered into and so, on that basis, the tax bill was overdue and outstanding as at 30th June in terms of Article 66 and as such no Euro Licence should have been granted.
However, the argument does not end there.
Auldheid, has posted frequently on these pages about the ins and outs of the licensing provisions and the mechanism and so I will leave that detail to him as he is far more expert in these areas than me.
Now, one of the SFA functions is to have an auditor– someone who can check books, contracts, paper work and so on, and it is part of the SFA licensing function to be satisfied that all the paperwork is of course correct and in proper fashion before they issue any licence.
In this case, it is alleged that the SFA did not perform their function properly.
In relation to the wee tax case, it is said that either they did not make sufficient enquiry of Rangers re the payment to account or the agreement which they were told was in place. At the time it was mooted in the press that no such agreement was in place as at the relevant date ( June 30th ) and a simple check with the revenue would have shown the truth of the matter.
Yet, for whatever reason, no such check appears to have been made, and if you recall a Radio Scotland interview with Alistair Johnstone, Rangers submitted the forms, the SFA replied with one or two enquiries about the BIG tax case which were answered, and thereafter the Licence appears to have simply dropped through the letter box without further ado.
You will also recall that the existence of the wee tax case became known BEFORE Craig Whyte bought David Murray’s shareholding in May 2011. In fact it was the subject of News Paper headlines weeks before the deal was completed, and so the fact that there was a wee tax bill was well and truly in the public domain.
When it came to filling in the appropriate forms,either, the SFA were mislead by those then at Rangers with regard to that tax bill, OR, they simply failed to do the requisite checks and make reasonable enquiries before they issued the licence.
However, the uncomfortable fact also remains, that one of the chaps who must have been in the know re the admittedly unlawful and offending side letters, contracts and payments to the three players concerned was Campbell Ogilivie who was on the Rangers Board at the relevant time when the contracts and irregular payments were made under the Discount Options Scheme from 1999 to 2002/3. Indeed he may even have initiated the first payment to Craig Moore in 1999. I reiterate that no one has ever contested that this was an unlawful scheme, and the irregular payments and paperwork are not denied in relation to that scheme.
There are Celtic shareholders who believe, rightly or wrongly, that when it came to the granting of the Euro Licence, the SFA did not play them fair on this occasion and that the wheels within Hampden were oiled in such a way that Rangers were favoured and Celtic were disadvantaged. It is a point that looks to have already been considered by the Celtic Directors in 2011, with the result that they concluded that they should formally write to the SFA and seek clarification.
However, we now have the prospect of those same directors having to go back to Hampden and say ” Sorry, but I am forced to bring this up by my shareholders. I have a legal duty to them to enquire further”. Even if the motion is refused, the point has been made– there are shareholders who are demanding answers– just as shareholders of other clubs demand answers about the ever so secret 5 way agreement and other matters which have hitherto been not for public consumption.
The SFA have nothing to fear of course as they can simply repeat their previous answers,demonstrate that all was above board, and rest easy in their beds.
Except that answer did not satisfy the Celtic Directors on a previous occasion as they decided to take the matter to UEFA, and it would appear that some Celtic shareholders remain dissatisfied with the known stance of the SFA and so they want the Directors of the club to delve further. Without wishing to point out the obvious, if it turns out that the 2011 Licensing process was somehow fudged and not conducted rigorously or that those at Hampden were in any way economical with the truth or omitted certain details from the previous explanation, or covered up a failure in procedures—- well such omissions have a habit of becoming public these days whether that be through the internet or otherwise.
The point here is that the actions of Hampden officials are coming under organised, legal and planned corporate scrutiny over which they have no control. The Blazer and club mentality that was once so widespread within the governing bodies is under increasing attack and is being rendered a thing of the past.
In short, the move by Celtic shareholders, is making it plain that they will demand proper corporate governance from their club in ensuring that any alleged failure in corporate governance by the SFA or SPFL is properly investigated and reported on.
Of course, if it turns out that the 2011 Licensing process was somehow fudged and not conducted properly for whatever reason, then it could be argued that Celtic were disadvantaged in monetary terms along with other clubs who may have been awarded Europa League licences, then the consequences could be cataclysmic. Hence a tendency to circle the wagons rather than admit to failures in the process that need addressing.
It is this reluctance to come out and accept that the licensing process appears to have failed, say at what point the process failed and what needs to be done to address those failures that in many ways has driven the resolution. It is clear to all that something is amiss but the SFA will not admit it, probably from fear of the consequences of doing so? Perhaps some form of indemnity, a lessons learned enquiry with no prejudice might help?
It would come as no surprise to me at all if there were those at Hampden who live in dreaded fear of admitting that their processes were flawed and that a grave mistake was made. Under these circumstances, there may well be those at Hampden who simply wish that Celtic and their fans would just go away!
Tif Finn says: (637)
October 30, 2013 at 8:45 pm
While I like what you say, I think there may be a problem in that even HMRC were blocked from preventing D&P becoming administrators despite being, by a long way, the major creditors. This time, with TRFC, it is highly unlikely that there will be any major creditors, outside RIFCplc and the others players in the charade, who will have any say in who is appointed. I’d be very surprised if there isn’t a firm of administrators already set up for the task to provide an outcome to suit the spivs rather than either the bears, or justice.
I’d think the only way that there would be a proper administration would be if BDO decided they had to take action to secure the assets to prevent an onward sale, in the event they have concluded that the sale of RFC(IL)’s assets was illegal. At the moment BDO may well consider there is plenty of time for them to carry out their investigations – while the assets remain with Sevco/TRFC. Should there be the possibility/inevitability of an administration, and selling off of the assets, I would expect them to up the ante by blocking any sale until their investigations are complete, or to get the agreement of the court to appoint, or be appointed, administrators of TRFC. This, of course, will all be mince if BDO have already decided/been told there is no case to answer!
oldbhoy99 says: (10)
October 30, 2013 at 9:23 pm
Slightly ot, and a far fetched question, so bear with me…
If ally mccoist can become a decent manager…and if rifc can up their game substantially…and if rifc can live until May…and rifc make the Scottish Cup final…and Celtic also make it…who gets the Euro slot that accompanies the trophy?
Presumably Celtic will have secured a Euro slot via the league, normally this would result in the Euro slot going to the beaten finalist(assuming that Celtic do what is expected and thrash rifc to within an inch of their dignity 😛 ). As we all know though, rifc do not possess the requisite 3 years national association membership, and cannot play in europe.
In this scenario, who gets to play in Europe? And how much spin and corruption might this scenario generate?
Off the radar I think…
________________________________
“In this scenario, who gets to play in Europe?”
I think the correct answer would be; the highest finisher in the Premiership not already qualified for the Euros. I suspect, though, that the SFA’s first thought would be to work out, how, by lies and deceit, they could secure TRFC a place in Europe.
Exiled Celt says: (753)
October 30, 2013 at 10:44 pm
Piece by Chris Graham replicated here if you don’t want to follow the link – please TD/TU for his “writings”
…………………
And to think the BBC allowed this guy air time..
Exiled Celt says: (753)
October 30, 2013 at 10:44 pm
Yet another call to arms from a ‘respected’ bear! Full of BS and inaccuracies. Now it’s all the Nomad’s fault and nothing to do with the Man Who Would Be King’s chequered past. I’d suggest Daniel Stewart take advice on security, and, strangely, I don’t think I’m joking.
I see that an advert has appeared from ‘Rangers Football Club’ seeking an experienced and motivated individual for the role of Chief Executive. The successful candidate would report to the ‘Board of Directors’.
Those interested are invited to send their CV to ‘the HR Department, Rangers Football Club Limited, Ibrox Stadium……….Glasgow’.
Who exactly would this Chief Executive be working for?
There is no legal entity called ‘Rangers Football Club, it has no Board of Directors.
There is no legal entity called ‘Rangers Football Club Limited, it has no Board of Directors.
Could it be that this job is with a company that is not even named in the job advert?
Is it actually with Rangers International Football Club Plc?
Could ‘Rangers’ be in breech of the Advertising Standards Authority codes of conduct again?
Resin_lab_dog says: (207)
October 31, 2013 at 12:38 am
Tif Finn says: (637)
October 30, 2013 at 11:15 pm
Philosophical Conundrum:
If they lie in the advert… does that mean its OK for me to lie on my CV?
============================
Now then Mr O’Flaherty. Thank you for your application. We note you describe yourself as a ‘Peepil person,’ one of the 500m, innovative esepcially when it comes to paying tax and not unfamiliar with ovine farm animals or having one trouser leg shorter than the other. We, the interview panel, put it to you that there may a degree of fabrication in these claims.
…well you fec’n started it!
Serious point – genuinely. Firstly the advert doesn’t appear to accurately state who the employer is, who the applicant will be CEO of, never mind the BSA’s recent comment re inappropriate claims.
Could I also highlight Liam McLeod’s comments on BBC’s coverage of the derby (in lieu of their pandering to Graham earlier in the day) that (obviously prior to Stevenson’s wonderful goal) that “these hearts fans are just glad to still have a club to support.”
When is a square not a square? When it’s a circle. Of lies, deceit, mis truths and deliberate illusion.
Allyjambo says: (638)
October 31, 2013 at 10:23 am
He’s being harsh blaming the NOMAD for delaying things. Didn’t PMG say he was on holiday for two weeks?
re: the TRFC CEO ad in the FT… wonder why applicants are invited to write to “Rangers Football Club Limited” – are they not passé?
ptd1978 says: (102)
October 31, 2013 at 10:54 am
I think after Graham’s rabble rousing he’d be wise to extend that holiday, by about a year.
I suspect that the TRFC (is it TRFC?) advert in the Times is actually a Halloween spoof, paid for by Peter Lawwell, in an effort to deflect from the fact that Celtic haven’t played in Europe for some time (over a week at least). As that very intelligent Chris Graham has pointed out, everything is Peter Lawwell’s fault, including the misrepresentation of ‘Rangers’ in the press, and so it can only be him who has put such an improperly worded, and misleading, advert for the top post at Ibrox, in the country’s most prestigious newspaper. Hang your head in shame, Mr Lawwell, and all you Celtic supporters too, you are, after all, only jealous!
Allyjambo says: (639)
October 31, 2013 at 10:12 am
=============================
Tif Finn says: (637)
While I like what you say, I think there may be a problem in that even HMRC were blocked from preventing D&P becoming administrators despite being, by a long way, the major creditors.
=============================
I know it is portrayed that way, but that’s not really the important point.
Craig Whyte indicated that Rangers may have to go into administration within the next couple of weeks. He did it on the steps of Ibrox. HMRC petitioned the Court of Session (I think it was the following day) for the club to go into administration. Craig Whyte objected to that saying he wanted to choose the administrator, so he would put the club into administration himself. HMRC agreed to that on the basis that 1, it happened that day and 2, Rangers paid their costs.
Rangers went into administration that day, with no prospect of ever obtaining a CVA. HMRC always intended Rangers being liquidated, the point of their petition was to make it happen without Whyte being able to feck about for another 2 weeks or so. The fact that they acted so quickly demonstrates that HMRC were well prepared for it.
Liquidation was inevitable as soon as Rangers stole over £10m from HMRC, in addition to the money they already owed. The whole (allegedly) making a deal to pay, then reneging, then the Sheriff’s Officers and arrestment didn’t help.
Mr Chris Graham:
A regular on Twitter (@JJMNJ) has provided them both with the relevant section of the act used to fine King. Oddly enough, nowhere does it mention “non payment of tax” or “felonies”. The section is reproduced below but don’t expect either of them to reference it or explain themselves. They don’t want to know.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-t-Hm2SNzmi0/UnFy2DdfOhI/AAAAAAAAA2w/L7BLN24ZfmA/s1600/Section+75.png
——
Dear Mr Graham (I’m sure you’re reading),
As seen in the above reproduced document, which part of “It is a serious offence” and “shall be guilty of an offence” do you not understand here in the context of “felony”?
Do you also not understand that the point of making a false declaration is to try and deceive the authorities with regard to how much tax you’re due to pay?
You surely cannot be as stupid as you’re making yourself sound.
For a brief run-down of some of Mr King’s fiddling activities, try this story (not likely to have been written by a Rangers Hater):
http://www.bdlive.co.za/opinion/columnists/2013/09/02/undictated-the-dogged-mr-chipps-who-brought-dave-king-to-book
redetin says: (245)
October 31, 2013 at 9:29 am
So the Administrators acted to the benefit of a company other than the one for which they were acting.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Redetin, keep in mind that D&P were working for CW
and while technically they were Administrators,
in reality, they were simply agents,
and Lord Hodge should have gone to Specsavers.
Tif Finn says: (638)
October 31, 2013 at 11:22 am
I agree, but my point was, that even with such a powerful creditor going against RFC/Whyte, they were still able to have their chosen administrator. There will be no such powerful creditors this time round, unless there is someone out there owed money we know nothing about, and as it would appear they have done nothing wrong/illegal, it will be carried out in a more or less voluntary basis with the one interest being the carving up of the assets to the spivs benefit. BDO will be the only people who can put the proverbial spanner in their works!
Know there isn’t much Rangersness on this site but sad to hear about Fernando Ricksen being diagnosed as having Motor Neurone Disease.
Another wee reminder that for all our debating, analysing and moaning on here, it is only a game and in the bigger scheme of things it is sometimes not that important.
Interesting 😉
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/518606/20131031/david-cameron-beneficial-ownership-uk-register-g8.htm
‘Britain will create a publicly available central register of companies’ beneficial owners in a bid to remove the cloak of secrecy over some firms and bolster the fight against tax avoidance and evasion.
A beneficial owner is a person who enjoys the benefits of ownership even though title of the asset is in another name.’
Speedy Paul McConville, Shakira’s Hips and the Whole Shebang.
Today the Herald let us know that an UTT had delivered a decision that schemes operated by Aberdeen Asset Management (AAM) in a very similar way to Murray International Holdings’(MIH) EBTs, were indeed liable to tax – a ‘win’ for HMRC. The Herald goes on to quote an HMRC spokesperson saying that they see this decision as assisting them in other cases, which the paper calls a ‘thinly veiled’ comment towards Rangers.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/hmrc-warns-rangers-ahead-of-appeal-over-36m-tax-case.22568390
A fair enough story from the Herald, but sadly failing on speed and accuracy. First, they are over a week late v Paul McConville’s Random Thoughts, so the online sources again trumping the traditional news outlet. Chapeau and gateau, Paul. http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2013/10/23/has-the-court-of-session-today-made-a-decision-which-will-win-hmrc-the-big-tax-case/
Second, the Herald again muddies the fact of which ‘Rangers’ they mean in the headline (although they do mention Oldco). Are HMRC warning the current Ibrox club in the headline, “HMRC warns Rangers ahead of appeal over £36m tax case”, given that the traditional media seem to almost always refer to the Rangers of today as simply ‘Rangers’?
The Herald headline has me puzzled as to the reference to Rangers, given the Big Tax Case was MIH v HMRC, and the £36m figure as it had been reported in a number of places as £46m – £47m.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-20414804
http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/201690-rangers-tax-case-tribunal-rules-462m-bill-substantially-reduced/
Were the non-Rangers amounts enough to explain the discrepancy? Possibly the 5 instances of avoidance from the Big Tax Case FTT that were admitted as liable for tax amount to a more considerable amount? Possibly there were penalties and interest to add on? Maybe some combination of these?
Despite reportage previously, much light still needs to be shone in the dark places and find myself quite cynical about the Rangers Saga (and many other news stories) generally. From the US Government agency’s surveillance and phone tapping (apparently the cat was out of the bag when Obama called Merkel to congratulate her on doing so well at Candy Crush), to the Coulson and Brooks trial, to news that traders once boasted of rigging the rates in the LIBOR scandal, but generally seem to have got away with their bonuses whilst the banks are hit with just a pitiful fine, to Dave King’s return and the line peddled that he has ‘settled’ with the SA tax authorities (he actually pled guilty to charges – big difference).
Where is simple honesty, integrity and probity in all this?
I take solace in the fact that we can all rely on Shakira’s Hips – they don’t lie.
If only we could ask those hips the questions that remain around old Rangers’ licence status between end March 2011 and end June of the same year? Or ask about the detail of the current Rangers accounts, why the non-playing salaries are so high? Or ask where next for today’s Rangers?
Whilst its difficult to pick through the deceit from the board of RIFC, one thing is true – there is only one pot, and there is only one revenue generating aspect: the football club. From that perspective it doesn’t matter how the Whole Shebang is set up or organised – they have the underlying and important issue of revenue in and spend out. They can organise Operation Rangers in any way they want, but revenue must increase, and spend must reduce.
I’ve read many times that the current Rangers might need a sugar daddy or an injection of money from somewhere. Well, if the tale has told us anything over the last few years it is this – they have never had a sugar daddy or any injection of cash without significant downsides. It has never happened from Murray Moonbeams, Craigie Shwhyte or Soylent Green. Each have had PR feed out stories, just as Dave King and the warring factions are doing now, but have ended up taking greatly from, not giving to, the operation and ultimately its fans.
The spivs and shysters are no sugar daddies, but instead are shafter daddies who might as well be saying, ‘I want to give Rangers an injection of investment. Please will Rangers turn round, drop the flannels to brogue level, and bend over so I can properly do so’.
The operation needs to sort out its attitude to its place in Scottish Football, sort out its finances along the lines of Dickens’ Mr Micawber, run the operation properly, and build from there.
wottpi says: (1243)
October 31, 2013 at 11:48 am
well said.
sad to hear about Fernando.
Allyjambo says: (641)
October 31, 2013 at 11:31 am
===================================
Tif Finn says: (638)
October 31, 2013 at 11:22 am
I agree, but my point was, that even with such a powerful creditor going against RFC/Whyte, they were still able to have their chosen administrator.
===========================================
I know what your point was, I just disagree with it. I think HMRC got exactly what they wanted.
Rangers were going to be liquidated whatever happened. Everything else was a charade. The fact that it was their own administrator who ran the process distanced HMRC from it.
You will note how adamant they were about choosing the people to do the liquidation.
redetin says: (245)
October 31, 2013 at 9:29 am
43 0 Rate This
Amongst all that was going on at the time, the one thing that perplexed me most was how D&P were allowed to change the name of the company in administration to RFC 2012 plc. What possible benefit to the creditors was this change?
Furthermore, this was done so that Sevco Scotland Limited could change its name simultaneously to The Rangers Football Club Limited.
So the Administrators acted to the benefit of a company other than the one for which they were acting.
======================
you could argue that the sale of assets may not have happened if the name change was not included in the process – as what would be the point in having a new clumpany called Sevco if you needed to be called Rangers to mislead the hordes?
Without the name, was their much point in buying anything?
http://sport.stv.tv/football/246299-watch-celtic-chief-executives-peter-lawwells-extended-interview/
Watched the STV interview with Peter Lawwell and I must say I found it hard to fault his performance in front of the camera, although his left hand was not under complete control.
It made me wonder as to why the BBC chose a radio interview with Stewart Regan recently instead of on TV.
Even just on sound, it is obvious that Regan did not put in a good performance.
My guess is that Regan’s confidence is low
and that possibly even his appearance has suffered due to the strain he has been under.
Two good reasons for being camera shy.
Or is Stewart Regan beginning to crack ?
Tif Finn says: (638)
October 31, 2013 at 11:22 am
Liquidation was inevitable as soon as Rangers stole over £10m from HMRC, in addition to the money they already owed. The whole (allegedly) making a deal to pay, then reneging, then the Sheriff’s Officers and arrestment didn’t help
==============================
To paraphrase Eric Morecambe “You are saying all the right words, just not necessarily in the right order”
CW ‘borrowed’ NIC and VAT liability for 10 months a/ well because he had to (thanks again Ally) and b/ to drive the bus into the wall to start the pre-pack. (To be clear I use the word start loosely here as the start was possibly arranged some time earlier in an office far from Glasgow, but I digress).
The CVA was supposed to be doomed on account of the Big Tax Case. The Big Tax Case was supposed to deliver during the administration period. I don’t think even CW appreciated how financially bottomed out things were down Ibrox way to believe that the wee tax case alone would have done the job. Thus RFC goes into admin all set to emerge debt free. HMRC don’t play ball by releasing the big tax case findings so in the absence of a decision either way (but a crucial pre-assumption (by Whtye) that they were truly rogered any way) they had to go down the liquidation avenue instead. Hence we see the reincarnation myth developing especially when both the SFA and FTT delivered out of the background.
Whyte intended liquidation since in his experienced view there was no chance of a positive CVA/debt arrangement. The PAYE bit was really just deliberately waving a red flag to the HMRC bull.
StevieBC says: (862)
October 30, 2013 at 2:26 pm
———————————————–
“…Rangers finance director, Brian Stockbridge, said: “We are delighted Ibrox Stadium has been chosen to host the Scottish Cup semi-finals in April.
“The Scottish FA’s decision to play these ties at the home of Scotland’s most successful club underlines the fact that Ibrox remains one of European football’s elite arenas.
“Of course we hope to travel far in this competition ourselves but no matter who plays at Ibrox they can be certain of the warmest of welcomes.”
Why the need for all this willy waving “we are a massive club” p1sh within practically every public statement or utterance from this lot? I think we know why. Such fragile egos demand high maintenance.
I’m sure the warmest of welcomes will be available to all clubs providing Sevco don’t happen to be boycotting whoever makes it to the semi finals and haven’t made any comments they deem inflammatory in their club programmes. I thought these guys were on a GIRUY journey “back” to the top and the fly kickers would be put in their place blah blah yadda yadda., yet the warmest welcome mats are – verbally at least – laid out when there are spondulicks in it for them. Dignity indeed.
I give up. The Daily Record has apparently been fooled by a new Sandy Easdale parody account on Twitter and published a quote online from it saying “All fans please stand and give your applause on the 2nd minute of our next game for #FernandoRicksen #RangersFamily”.
Fair enough but other (and easily seen) tweets from the recently added account include:
McGills buses are top notch. There’s simply no competition, don’t burn yourself out trying to compete with our buses.
aye.. that’ll be right.. Mr King may not wake up tomorrow.
Really want one of those old style Cadillacs! #AlCapone
Want a house? F£$% William McGill, gees a phone! Cheap prices! #AlmostASteal!
@WATP_Andy #AskAndy Will you show your support for current board if we slip you a fiver? … or perhaps bust your kneecaps?
I’m a nasty motherf***er, don’t mess with me.
@ofvoid Learn to keep your mouth shut, or you’ll be sleeping with the fishes in the Clyde!
@LordTrevelyan I have connections, now continue to say nice things.
It’s true, we’ve agreed for David King to come and meet with us, question is will he leave in one piece?
@stewart11rfc I’d sleep with one eye open if I were you. Don’t ever disrespect me again…
I’m the boss. Simple as that. Don’t disagree with me and make me do something I regret.
—————–
Did they not think to check if the account was real or even read any of the stuff above? A truly shocking rag.
ratethisthenyabampots says:
============================
That can’t be right. The Daily Record are famous for meticulously checking any story before publishing it.
Tif Finn says: (639)
October 30, 2013 at 8:52 pm
OCTOBER 30, 2013
Bad News On King’s Return
I am led to believe that Dave King’s return to Ibrox as a director would be blocked by both the SFA and the London Stock Exchange.
ForresDee says: (114)
October 30, 2013 at 9:44 pm
So King possibly can’t join the board, it’s all just been squirrels. King can’t bring the millions required, it’s all the fault of AIM and SFA (Lawwell) – excellent moving of the blame away from the asset strippers, admin inbound, how many points will be deducted?
———————————————————————-
I in no way wish to present a defence of the SFA in any way shape or form, however McMurdo’s claim that the Lying King has been blocked by the London Stock Exchange (should that not be AIM?) AND the SFA is a bit disingenuous to say the least is it not?
Surely if stock exchange rules/procedures prevent King from becoming a director then the SFA don’t even have a decision to make, the whole thing becomes moot, and let’s face it, most onlookers would be astonished if the SFA stood in the way of the next wealth off the radar billionaire. So really it’s AIM who are putting the knockers on the whole thing. Why then the concerted attempt to weave the SFA into responsibility for this (non)event? Is it top gun G force simulator levels of spin to deflect from the fact Mr King cannot or will not invest any hard cash, or is it just the usual bitter twisting of things to put out anti-Celtic/SFA/’no-one likes us an we’re really upset about it’ propaganda with no particular objective?
Exiled Celt says: (753)
October 30, 2013 at 10:44 pm
2 22 i
Piece by Chris Graham replicated here if you don’t want to follow the link – please TD/TU for his “writings”
==================
These are the people who will blame the SFA if King gets his seat and it all goes mammaries skywards.
Perhaps Ryan Gosling would care to comment?
It’s Autumn and there have never been so many Blue Squirrels to be seen including
– Tufty when he’s out without his wee blue breeks on a frosty morning.
– CEO Ads for an organisation which doesn’t exist in the FT following well placed rumours of imminent appointments – like current executives from Liverpool FC. Newcastle FC or even the currently unemployed shareholder, Bonus Boy Longmuir.
– The Return of the King to claim his throne and / or to front fund raising.
– Anything after Christmas (just 8 weeks) like hosting semi finals of the Scottish Cup in April (20 odd weeks away) or even big money transfer targets in the January transfer window.
SEVCO’S FORTHCOMING ADMINISTRATION &/or LIQUIDATION
Whatever happens at and beyond the AGM down Ibrox way,
and, not writing off BDO completely,
nor forgetting the UTT sometime in the Spring 2014,
the timing of any Administration will be crucial –
to Sevco fans.
The reason being that as in 2012 with RFC(IL),
Sevco have to make it to the end of the season
so as to make it easier for Campbell up at the Office
to do what only Campbell can do
and secure Sevcos’ continuity within the League and the Association.
To that end, the income from a conveniently awarded double Scottish Cup semi-final gate will come in handy
and if that’s not enough then the CW trick of using unremitted PAYE, NIC and VAT to pay the bills
should take Sevco through to the end of their second season.
Did I miss anything ?
MoreCelticParanoia
====================
As I have said before, if Dave King gets a place on the Club’s board (as opposed to the PLC’) I doubt AIM (which is a market on the stock exchange) would be interested. The SFA would be though.
The analogy is probably the Easdales. If I remember correctly James took a seat on the PLC board, Sandy (the convicted tax fraudster) took a seat on the club’s board.
It is worth noting that doesn’t stop Sandy talking about the PLC and say he is making decisions for it. Shadow Director anyone.
It appears that Ally has cancelled the Forfar tie on 16 nov due to international call ups (stop sniggering at the back!). Does this mean the much delayed AGM can go ahead on that day, given that they’ll still have to pay all the facility staff costs?
This was in the comments section of the Copland Roas blogg for Chris Graham’s piece:
Lost for words here. So…if you express an opinion on Jogn Grieg’s intelligence in a private email you’re the Devil Incarnate, if you’ve not paid any tax for ten years and have criminal charges it’s the country’s judicial system that needs investigated???
Johnny: How confident are you with the South African Judicial system considering it is controlled by the ANC and I feel Mr King had no other option. Remember the miners that got shot last year and in this country an enquiry would have happened immediately it took SA a year , I could also add land grabbing etc etc it is a sad fact that the SA judiciary system has now dropped to the level of a third world country since the ANC came to power.
I could also argue that a majority shareholder and non executive director who owned the Betdaq company and still has board influence in the betting company he sold it to seems to pass muster , notwithstanding the Australian government called it and in effect him a rogue operator.
So is Dave King any worse than a majority shareholder and non executive director at another scottish club ?
Most countries including Australia have a different outlook on betting as we in the UK do and see betting exchanges as the devil, it took them a long time to accept Betfair and it’s relatively on their terms. For example you need a second bank of cash in Betfair to bet on anything that takes place within Australia like the tennis major or the Ashes. So that comment strikes of straws being clutched at lol.
He seems to have got his “phrase” from this piece by searching for anything he could get negatively on betdaq
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/opinion/rogue-operators-make-battle-to-maintain-integarity-of-sport-more-difficult/story-e6frg7t6-1226095581959
Tif Finn says: (641)
October 31, 2013 at 1:24 pm
Both Easdale brothers sit on the ‘club’ board.
James joined on 09/07/2013.
Alexander joined on 11/09/2013.
http://companycheck.co.uk/company/SC425159/THE-RANGERS-FOOTBALL-CLUB-LIMITED/directors-shareholders
douglas reynholm @ 1.42pm Johnny: How confident are you with the South African Judicial system considering it is controlled by the ANC and I feel Mr King had no other option. Remember the miners that got shot last year and in this country an enquiry would have happened immediately it took SA a year , I could also add land grabbing etc etc it is a sad fact that the SA judiciary system has now dropped to the level of a third world country since the ANC came to power.
========================== I hope this guy does not drive any machinery.
“Lid to be lifted” on Blue Pitch and Margarita?
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/rangers/lid-to-be-lifted-on-gers-secret-backers-141092n.22568121
I hate to assist the distinguishing of the Evening Times’ fire but did no-one think to ask the question…Hang on, the SFA said they got told all of this in August 2012 did they not?
So, either they were told and thought it didn’t matter. Or they weren’t told and thought it didn’t matter.
trying to determine the names behind BPH and margarita is a bit of a nonsense as far as voting goes
they only have 10%, it’s not such a big issue – still 90% of the votes to be won/lost
it’s a big squirrel
the interesting thing about the names behind these 2 will be if 1 of them is Craig Whyte or ticketus. One will (sorry, SHOULD) cost Sevco it’s SFA membership immediately. The other shows us that ticketus want their money back – and are going to get it too.
Off topic and I hope I don’t get into trouble with the mods but this is very funny:
cartuja @cartujakds 15m
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BX6aLu4CEAAz7gW.jpg:large
If we never hear who BPH and the pizza are then we can assume that it is in fact Mr Whyte (in the boardroom with an unpaid tax bill)
Carfins Finest says: (33)
October 31, 2013 at 9:43 am
I fear that the hopes that Raith Rovers had for a family type of event have been cruelly dashed.
————————————————————–
Yep
If I was in charge at Stenhousemuir I’d keep the date of the Ramsdens final free in my diary though, just in case.
andygraham.66 says: (53)
October 31, 2013 at 3:00 pm
If we never hear who BPH and the pizza are then we can assume that it is in fact Mr Whyte (in the boardroom with an unpaid tax bill)
=======================
Correct. This is an interesting play by the requisitioners. First of all, no chance its Whyte as to do so would cause too large a potential threat to either their existence or their friends in office who presumably had chosen to ignore the infiormation previously. Ticketus – well no-one should be surprised if it is although one would have thought the question would be hang on why are Ticketus in here if they had CW personally on a stick (and no subsequent interest in Sevco)? If Ticketus do have a stake its because CW gave them his one, IMHO.
Best bet, especially with a wee media shock and awe preparation piece like todays would be Stockbridge in one of his guises (was it Zeus, too many to remember now). McColl presumably trying to force his pro-board 10% onto the market for him, or more correctly, some other mug to buy up and vote him in.
Still doesn’t rule out Bartin Main’s asset ownership/floating charge claim of course bearing in mind BDO were going to be reporting by the end of the month!
I am inclined it think that this “transparency” surrounding the unveiling of a the hidden shareholders will be as transparent as a plasterboard wall.
These guys are anonymous for a reason – after all they have gone to great lengths thus far to protect their identities. It would be naïve to assume that they will now just roll over to have their tummies tickled, now that Scotland’s Greatest Tightwad (or Four-Share McColl as he is known in bus-operating circles) has rattled the kennel.
Be prepared for the naming of wives, daughters, Godsons and noms de plume of the rich and silent to be cascaded over the pages of the red-tops.
Transparency only works of the light is on. All of this will be done in the dark. The question is how long will the fans trip over the furniture and stumble from wall to wall in the hope that when the lights do go on, there will be any furniture left?
Not holding my breath for that either.
‘Pandering to the frothing of Celtic fans and their useful idiots who see King as a serious threat to their current dominance appears to be the order of the day.’
‘Useful idiots’ ……….from the man who championed Craigie boy’s arrival at Ibrox, from the man who publicly and enthusiastically rimmed Charlie boy to help sell season books, and shares in ‘the company’……..for CG to call anyone else a useful idiot………… 😆 😆 😆
Phil MacG tweeting that the PCC have confirmed that they have received a complaint about the King Record story, presumably from AIM. Mr Keevins on the trannie tonight, wonder if he will take the opportunity to correct the, ahem, Record?
Just switched on Sky Sports News and they’re trailing an exclusive interview with Jim McColl at 5.00pm. if you’re interested.
More horseshit from McColl….Yorkie took them out of administration,FFS how gullible does he think people are ?.Sorry,what am I thinking.
Tif Finn says: (641)
October 31, 2013 at 12:00 pm
I was making my point with complete disregard to whatever HMRC wanted, merely comparing the situation then, where the spivs at RFC didn’t have total control over events, even though they might have thought they had, to the scenario that exists at present, as we know it, where there is no major creditor outside the ranks of RIFC. The fact that, as you described correctly, HMRC were indeed able to force Whyte’s hand shows what forces were available then that are not now. Now any admin event is going to be carried out, not only with their choice of administrator, but with no one other than we bampots, or some more spiv-savvy bears, keeping an eye on them. That is unless there is some major creditor out there we have no concrete evidence or knowledge of (perhaps Craigie Boy), or BDO come in and say ‘no you don’t’.
A new insolvency event surrounding the assets of RFC(IL) might just be the final piece of the jig-saw BDO need before taking action.
❓ ❓ ❓ loads of new information there eh???
Who’s the bouncy eye brow popping presenter? 😀 😀
Danish Pastry says: (1612)
October 31, 2013 at 2:29 pm
Here’s yet another recent example of doublespeak and spin from SMS, this time it’s from Alison McConnell and/or Mathew Lindsay of the Evening Times not being “100% accurate” in their assessment of Peter Lawwell’s position viz a viz a potential ‘conflict of interest’ with regard to the Dave King situation.
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/rangers/lid-to-be-lifted-on-gers-secret-backers-141092n.22568121
“Meanwhile, Peter Lawwell has hinted that he would excuse himself if he felt there was a conflict of interest in his position on the SFA board of directors.
South African businessman Dave King is seeking to become chairman of Rangers.
But the Scot will need approval from the SFA that he is a “fit and proper” candidate to be charged with the running of a Scottish football club.
His return requires ratification from the SFA board, which Lawwell is now a key part of.
The Celtic chief executive was reluctant to be ushered into a conversation and the possibilities of the vote.
However, he did suggest that he would not be present if he felt compromised making the decision.
He said: “My main interest is Celtic, to promote and maximise the interests of Celtic and maximise it’s potential. That’s my prime concern in life.
“But I wouldn’t have taken the job on the SFA board if I felt the two couldn’t be aligned.
“There are areas where there will be conflict, no question, like the Scottish Cup Final, where there were other bidders. I would excuse myself in terms of the final decision.
“I will do the job properly. There will be sensitive issues, but I don’t think there will be too many where I would be conflicted.
“There’s maybe one or two coming up, but that would be SFA board business and not for today.””
Never having been a journalist, I don’t know for certain, but I would guess that the rule for quoting an individual in a newspaper piece is the same as the rule for doing so in any piece of formal writing, i.e that quotation marks should be used to indicate, direct speech or quotations (if I recall the “First Aid in English” correctly they were called Direct Speech Marks back in the day).
I must assume, then, that Peter Lawwell spoke directly in the presence of either Alison McConnell or Mathew Lindsay who shared the by-line, because the piece is liberally peppered with direct quotes attributed to him.
If, on the other hand, she/he/they used as their source material the STV Online extended interview that Raman did with PL then we have yet another blatant example of someone being misrepresented by the MSM .
http://sport.stv.tv/football/246299-watch-celtic-chief-executives-peter-lawwells-extended-interview/
Here is a transcript of the relevant part of the PL/RB interview. Compare and contrast the Evening Times’ ‘quotes’ with the actual quotes.. Note the number of time PL says “direct conflict” or “obvious conflict” and decide for yourself what point he’s trying to make with regard to the Dave King issue.
RB: “The Professional Game Board may, may have to make a key decision in the upcoming weeks
or months and there’s been a suggestion made that if that decision has to be made there may be
a conflict of interest. How do you respond to that?”
P.L. “Well, it’s a very complex issue and, again, it’s one for the PGB initially, it may ultimately be
the SFA Board but, again, I think it would be difficult for me to comment on that SFA business
here today without having fully consulted with my colleagues.”
R.B. “But if you felt there was a conflict of interest you would……..”
P.L. “Well as an example in terms of the Scottish Cup Final where clearly we were in the bidding
for the final I would have to excuse myself from any discussion on that because there was a
direct conflict – as an example – so where there is a very obvious and direct conflict you
would excuse yourself from that debate and the vote on the final was made by the other
directors and that would be the case on any matters that have obvious conflict.”
R.B. “And you would be prepared to do that perhaps again if another issue were to arise?”
P.L. “Certainly. Where there is any very obvious conflict I have a duty to do that, yes.
Giving the two reporters the benefit of the doubt, they have paraphrased his comments, but have mistakenly presented it as direct quotes. Shabby, very shabby “journalism”. (“Quotation marks can also be used to indicate a different meaning of a word or phrase than the one typically associated with it and are often used to express irony.” Wikipedia.)
McColl – “Charles Green, to be fair, took Rangers out of administration”. Aye, straight to liquidation. Another one for whom the truth is a stranger.
McColl said that he looks after other people’s money,he also said that there are other people out there,wealthy of course,who look upon Sevco as a good investment.( sorry, I can hardly type for laughing )
Where the feck has he been ?. Good investment my arse.
Why does he not ask his clients to invest ? Wont chance the old commission maybe.
Finances Critical by April. I wonder what calendar he uses.
It’s critical now Jim.
Hi folks
I would be grateful if someone could post up a YouTube clip of the McColl interview-it sounds like a hoot!
Thanks
Maybe as it is Hallowe’en McColl is out on Sky guising
“In Modern Times
By the end of the 19th century Hallowe’en had become very much a festival for children. Dressing up and going “guising” is a tradition which has lasted to the present day. The original idea was to dress as SPIRITS OF THE DEAD but options have widened over the years. When MONEY WAS TIGHT, dressing up in some old clothes from grandparents was all that was required.”
Who was that team in rangers colours the other night !!
Worth bearing in mind
The shareholders and beneficiaries at BPH and Margarita do not have to be the same now as when the deal was done
Small piece on Rangers in the latest Private Eye (Planet Football, back pages), nothing too exciting.
As for “taking Rangers out of administration”, that’s a truly remarkable thing to say. Either the fellow has no idea what he’s talking about, or knows full well and is simply a barefaced liar.
Or he’ll have some cute explanation about “Rangers” meaning the Club entity thingy, which was saved from the liquidation event by being bought as an asset of the company … (cont. p94 in above issue of Private Eye).
2 semi finals of league cup to be played at Easter Road, thank god on a common sense decision.
ICT V Hearts and Aberdeen v St Johnstone
Should be cracking ties. I love Armageddon,
Things to be ‘critical’ by April. Could be two Wraiths meeting at Easter Road then. Although if TRFC are out of business by then it may be a one-horse Wraith.
I’ll get ma turnip lantern.
Barcabhoy says: (256)
October 31, 2013 at 5:51 pm
4 0 Rate This
Worth bearing in mind
The shareholders and beneficiaries at BPH and Margarita do not have to be the same now as when the deal was done.
———-
But there should be a paper trail? Mind you, if the original investors used money that, figuratively speaking, fell off the back of a figurative lorry, then the papers might have been mislaid.
If the Sevco fans demand to know who the peepil behind BPH and Margarita are ,then why is it the MSM are saying M’coll knows who they are and will reveal them next week .Is it
1, to clear their outing with his lawyers
2. to bury any links found to who they really are .
We demand to know
MoreCelticParanoia – thanks for thinking of me, I’m touched!
I had my say on the Dave King issue the other night with regards to the SFA’s fit and proper test. If he passes it then I think it basically demonstrates 100% that there is no point in having the “test”, if that wasn’t already proved beyond doubt through Craig Whyte’s ratification. Having said that, if he takes over and it goes t1ts up, I’m not necessarily sure I’d “blame” the SFA. I would however be iron clad in my belief that they are beyond pointless.
I’d imagine the Spivs are delighted by McColl’s armageddon-esque portrayal of finances down Govan Way. What better way to make a killing on their 1p shares?
I can almost hear them shouting “Roll roll up, save your Rangers here. Shares 2 for a £1, 2 for a £1”
And don’t worry, dear Bears, if you can’t afford the stadium, training ground or car park, I’m sure those nice gentlemen will come to an arrangement over a rent free period for you now.
We’ve all said the Bears cannot possibly be duped again.
I think we’re all going to be wrong.
Some transcript from the McColl interview.
http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11781/9001233/businessman-jim-mccoll-has-vowed-to-bring-stability-back-to-troubled-rangers
Re M’Coll,s SSN interview
He raised the fact that the IPO costs where 25% instead of the average 5% .
This is old news ,why was he not shouting about it when it was first revealed ,why now ?
Also seems he is not too willing to put a lot (if any) of his own money into the new investment gamble but is bigging up the Sevco 2012 as a great investment opportunity for other (mugs ) sorry investors out there.
I would love to hear his pitch at an investors gathering . 😯 😯 🙄 :slamb: 👿
What an utter shame for Fernando Ricksen. I’ve just seen his interview on Dutch TV. Football fans come in for much criticism but I’m sure the vast majority from every club have nothing but best wishes for Fernando Ricksen in his battle. Football and the rivalries it thrives on really are secondary to life itself.
I wish him well.
fergusslayedtheblues says: (172)
October 31, 2013 at 6:32 pm
Re M’Coll,s SSN interview…
======================
You beat me to it fstb.
McColl says in one breath – IMO – that he can’t get involved because it is not attractive as an investment.
Then in the next breath he says it is a great investment for others though :
“…potential for them to make a good return on that money is quite fantastic…”
A bit surprised / disappointed with his interview, but his target audience will no doubt lap it up.
StevieBC
I know he is reluctant to do TV interviews ,maybe he was just uncomfortable on TV but he did not sound at all ,convincing to me
So within the next few weeks there will be interviews for a CE as a result of the FT ad. That’s everything pushed well into December.
v
fergusslayedtheblues says: (173)
October 31, 2013 at 6:53 pm
StevieBC
I know he reluctant to do TV interviews ,maybe he was just uncomfortable on TV but he did not sound at all convincing to me
=========================
I imagine it would be difficult to feel comfortable when lying through your teeth on TV.
Danish Pastry says: (1616)
October 31, 2013 at 6:54 pm
==============================
It reminds me of when Terry Cassidy was appointed C.E of Celtic in the early 90’s. He had previously been M.D of the Herald Group so was obviously no dummy, but he was constantly portrayed as a complete clown by the Scottish media, most of whom were in Murray’s pocket. I wonder if the new Rangers C.E will receive such a media savaging without being given a chance.
Tic 6709 says: (522)
October 31, 2013 at 6:56 pm
0
0
Rate This
v
fergusslayedtheblues says: (173)
October 31, 2013 at 6:53 pm
StevieBC
I know he reluctant to do TV interviews ,maybe he was just uncomfortable on TV but he did not sound at all convincing to me
=========================
I imagine it would be difficult to feel comfortable when lying through your teeth on TV.
=========================
I think that is included under essential technical competencies for the CEO role of any club playing out of Ibrox.
Monitoring what is happening in Vincent Lunny world, I see he has issued 2 further notices of complaint against Dundee United’s Nadir Ciftci, over and above his sending off on Tuesday.
Having watched the melee on BBC, and noting that they highlighted Ciftci’s involvement in isolation when many players appeared to raise hands, I am more than a little surprised at Lunny taking today’s steps.
It seems the officials are stating Cictci was dismissed for pushing another player’s hand away, which Dundee United are appealing (on the grounds of wrongful dismissal for violent conduct).
The two new charges involve him “grabbing an opposing player by his face” and, get this, “Excessive misconduct at a match by seizing hold of an Assistant Referee, namely Gavin Harris, by the throat.”
I’ve watched the highlights from the stand side, that is opposite the position of the BBC cameras, thus closer to the fracas. From what I’ve seen, perhaps the Assistant Referee lays hands on the player, rather than the other way around.
The whole thing looks a mess, and I wonder if the officials concocted a story after seeing the BBC highlights. It wouldn’t be the first time. Didn’t they realise alternative footage exists?
Dundee United released an unedited version to the public earlier, but have now removed it. Perhaps it was helpful to their appeal, and they don’t want somebody being prepared in advance of that event in a week’s time. However, a shorter version is still available for streaming, if you’re fast, here:
http://media.arabzone.co.uk/streams/smstr/131029RED_SHORTER/
McColl doing a Shankly, 500M wouldn’t buy them, and I’m one of them.
He won’t be doing anymore TV interviews because he was uncomfortable with Jim Whyte doing a Vic reeves rubbing his hands up and doon his thighs and slevering about Jim’s wad.
Well at least Wulliam Jnr can get his Christmas presents this year, but Benidorm at the fair might be cancelled.
Resin_lab_dog says: (208)
October 31, 2013 at 7:12 pm
=============== That’s just it Resin,there has been Not One,No Not One person connected to Sevco who has told the Truth. Pathetic really.
All the information needed for the fans is out there .