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!
StevieBC says: (872)
November 5, 2013 at 3:32 pm
AGM
====
So currently, for RIFC plc we only have one Exec Director – Stockbridge – and one NED – an Easdale.
Assuming they can’t , [or don’t want to], add further directors meantime…
What would happen if the only Exec Director was unable to attend the AGM for a ‘valid reason’ e.g. health issue, resignation, etc… ?
Can’t imagine a sole NED would be allowed to run a plc AGM alone ?
………………………………………
It does sound very Monty Python-esque……
I can visualise a room full of card board cut outs….and Mr. Easdale
StevieBC says: (872)
November 5, 2013 at 3:32 pm
5 0 Rate This
AGM
What would happen if the only Exec Director was unable to attend the AGM for a ‘valid reason’ e.g. health issue, resignation, etc… ?
Can’t imagine a sole NED would be allowed to run a plc AGM alone ?
==========
I stand to be corrected, but I don’t think there is a procedural or legal problem, although it would look very, very bad indeed. The AGM is a meeting of shareholders,and the Directors are legally obliged to provide certain reports to the shareholders in advance of the meeting, but I wonder whether an AGM would be invalid if no directors turned up? Surely the shareholders present could elect a chairman from their own ranks? No doubt the first vote would be to kick out the directors, for discourtesy if nothing else.
Here is a link to the the legislation, if anyone is interested. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/part/13/chapter/3/crossheading/procedure-at-meetings
Unless the company has something to the contrary in its own articles, then it seems to me that a valid meeting could in theory be held with just two shareholders present and no directors, so long as all the correct notices have been issued in good time to all shareholders..
Finloch says: (207)
November 5, 2013 at 2:58 pm
Your historical perspective points to a plan however it was never the intended plan and was buffeted by events.
Now that the Rangers support have partially risen from their SMSM-induced slumber are they just going to pony up a load of dosh and what will there response be to those Scottish-based directors promoting another coffer filling share issue.
Football is a strange business and is was the high emotions of most of the Scottish supporters that got Rangers relegated and Ally’s insistence on 1990’s tactics that got Rangers knocked out of Europe , both game changers that mucked up plan A.
Seems to me if the spivs want to shuffle some paper with a gullible Rangers front man toransfer stadium ownership , share issue etc the Rangers fans going to stand by AGAIN , shrug their shoulders and say , hey that’s OK anything to stop Celtic or ……………They may indeed say YES, the school of “we had no choice” ……….. say ‘NO’ implies a bhoycott , however they have no effective leadership which to rally round , so splits are inevitable ………
I don’t know the answer but I suspect that the often vented anger of the Rangers fans may just be working out the correct direction for this anger ………. gut feel spivs chased out of Scotland , court cases galore , general chaos , probable ADMIN , bhoycotts. splits , and on and on, this could go on for years ………
Greenock Jack says: (150)
November 5, 2013 at 4:40 pm
0 6 Rate This
Tif
MM knows them because he brought them to the table.
He is now an integral part of an effort to bring stability and credibilty to the board. This is tangibly supported by said institutions, in a bid to protect their respective investments.
===============
I understand all that, but Murray was only recently booted off the Board, despite being the institutions’ man at Ibrox. How could that happen? And now Murray returns, backed by the same institutions who watched him being kicked out, but stood by and did or said nothing? There is something about this that doesn’t smell right.
Greenock Jack says:
======================
I’m afraid that is just nonsense.
He is not on the Rangers board, and they are not listed as shareholders because they hold less than 3%. So how does he know they are not the people who have been selling their shares. How does he know they have the same holding as before, or any at all. Is it the same holding as Jim McColl is allged to have, about a fiver’s worth.
He is either guessing, or someone is supplying him with information. Neither is appropriate for discussion on live radio. Unles, like I said he was told by them that they were still involved and that it was OK to mention it on the radio.
He is quite possibly misleading the fans, current shareholders, potential shareholders if there is another offering, and everyone else.
Him “bringing them to the table” is irrelevant. Or did you forget he was effectively thrown out of the PLC and is just speaking as a disgruntled former employee. It’s about as dignified as a director of a publicly traded company videoing the chairman staggering about p!553d and releasing that video onto the interweb.
Talksport interview
================
[Don’t know if posted yet], but Evening Times has a rather sanitised summary of the Murray interview.
A very positive piece about ‘Rangers’ and its glorious future.
And apparently there was nothing controversial at all about his interview.
ET’s Matthew Lindsay must have received extra succulent lamb rations for this PR piece…
:slamb: :slamb: :slamb:
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/rangers/u/murray-end-feuds-and-rangers-can-be-as-big-as-mancheser-united.1383565308
Neepheid,
MM hung in there so long because of the institutions.
After two main attacks aimed at getting him to resign failed, he ended up seeing Green and Ahmad out the door before being forced out himself.
The spivs are the one’s who have caused the absolute dysfunctionality from CW onwards and it stinks.
TF
MM isn’t guessing and he has what you call ‘permission’ so there is nothing to see in this particular angle.
StevieBC says: (873)
November 5, 2013 at 5:20 pm
Priceless, though I think the light that Mr Murray sees may well prove to be an oncoming train!
Jack
I can understand the “Requisitioners” not wanting to give the “Management” any more money, I wouldn’t want to give them any either.
However, Rangers are where they are. The people who own RIFC are the rightful owners, they paid for it, and however questionable their conduct may have been, they don’t appear to have broken any laws. To put it bluntly, they want what they want, and, up to now they have been impervious to all attempts to get them to move on, (a few actors have left the public stage pockets bulging, but the farce continues). Its pretty clear to me at least that they ain’t going until they get what they want., what’s not clear is just what the “what” is….!
I think the spiv’s plan has been broadly sussed and is broadly still on track.
We are at the perfectly timed endgame where the lock in expires the deals agreed are cashed in, the club is held ransom by the company ( TRFC by RIFC) and a no lose scenario for the Spivs is matched by a no win one for any Rangers fans.
Their best option is a Plan A mark who steps in and pays off the spivs – but apart from themselves and they may already be maxxesd out on their willingness to keep on paying – there are no marks stepping up to play the role of Sugar daddy.
Who is going to pony up for the £1 TRFC with the lifetime rent liability (business with no assets trading at a 15mill per annum loss)? Or pony up the 20+ million to buy out the TRFC debt and keep the assets and loss making business going.
Only an immediate input of significant cash from an as yet unidentified and unidentifiable source can allow any club to operate at Ibrox until the end of the season. Otherwise the gates will lock. Those running Ibrox at the moment don’t really care either way. They will hold on to the assets and clean up either way.
The stench of desperation just keeps getting stronger.
Scapa
I hear you but no-one is forced to go anywhere.
The current impasse is about control in the boardroom.
Shareholders shall be the decision makers and hopefully it will be a step forward.
StevieBC says:
November 5, 2013 at 5:20 pm
A very positive piece about ‘Rangers’ and its glorious future.
——
“Rangers can be as big as Manchester United”
… and tomorrow’s headline: “Rangers considering multi-million dollar deal with New York Giants / Boston Redsox / etc (cont. p94)”? 🙄
Greenock Jack says: (152)
November 5, 2013 at 5:20 pm
1 6 Rate This
… MM hung in there so long because of the institutions.
After two main attacks aimed at getting him to resign failed, he ended up seeing Green and Ahmad out the door before being forced out …
————–
Do you think he was connected to CF? I did at one point, and I still wonder. There was a very revealing tweet at one point in the conflab.
Regans response here is incredible. Total incompetence.
Peter @macbloscaidh 2h
Memo to any football club owing tax & wanting to play in Europe. Disagree with the bill, you’ll get your licence.
http://i.imgur.com/lLI8xpj.jpg
Greenock Jack says: (152)
November 5, 2013 at 5:53 pm
I hear you, but, I think you’ll find that the AGM, if and when it happens, will resolve the square root of feck all
Scapa
If spivs lost majority control, I said ‘step’ forward, in the singular.
Important step though !
I don’t for a minute think that would be everything sorted.
DP
No, very much doubt it.
Re there being a plan in the Ibrokes circus
IMO there has always been a plan and although a couple of unexpected hurdles have led to some pitfalls ,the peepil singled out to be at the top of the marble staircase in the beginning will be the ones there at the end of this farce .
1. sell Ragers = done
2. Use CL income to get to the end of the season = failed
3. Liquidate Ragers to get rid of Hector and all sold off revenue streams ( most for years ahead )= done .
4.Get the fans to believe Sevco is still the same club = done
5.Get peepil running our game to make sure Sevco stay in the top flight ,then pass new club onto the buyers sounded out originally =failed
2.led to the club running out of funds mid season and CW having to stiff Hector for more money (making any CVA impossible ) not a problem really as liquidation got rid of all dues to be paid (allegedly )
5.There was never going to be any problem with the peepil in charge but the true Scottish football supporters stupidly believed that an honest game and level playing field was more important than allowing a new club to waltz straight into the SPL whilst pretending to be an old club recently lost to the history of our game ala ,Airdrie and Third Lanark .A club that left a 275 strong trail of creditors behind without a second thought .
It was, IMO these sold off revenue streams that made it imperative that the club were liquidated ,the face painter and the local newsagent may have gave up on getting their cash in full but would business people who had on going airtight contracts with Ragers whilst the club was still the same .
While the MSM trot out the EBT liability and CW led to the companies demise ,they seem to gloss over the fact that the club was running for years on an unviable business plan (see H Adam ) .
My problem is that the original peepil sounded out to get the keys to Ibrokes ,must have thought they were getting them with the new club (shhhhhhh) sitting in the SPL debt free . Sevco posted losses of 19m up till June ,who is owed that money .RIFC I hear you say but who is RIFC ,hell even MM says he does not know (stop laughing at the back ).How many of us have wondered why no effective cost cutting has been done ,the Sevco fans have started to wonder where all the money has gone ,what if it’s all gone in paying the players in this saga ,the faceless ,shy and retiring peepil MM spoke of on Talksport .
Someone is going to take the hit for Sevco starting life in the bottom tier rather than the top and I will be amazed if it’s any of the original peepil sounded out .
Why is MM ,DK and J Mc saying absolutely nothing about the 19m loses in the Sevco business they say they are going to take over ,surely these losses cannot go on ,unless the losses are of no consequence .
As someone posted earlier ,something stinks here and continues to stink .
Greenock Jack says: (154)
November 5, 2013 at 5:20 pm
TF
MM isn’t guessing and he has what you call ‘permission’ so there is nothing to see in this particular angle.
========================================================
I take it you have inside information, would you care to share it.
Re MaL Murray
I have friends that know him very well from his time in London working in a market that requires the utmost of integritery ,he is prone to a few sherbets that can loosen the tongue,,,Malcolm is not a squirrel he is the cat amongst the pigeons,by the3 way guys a bottle of balvennie 12 y/o has shot up to 39 u/s dollar ,reading up on some interesting points re-Scottish re-freeing,somethings about to need a nappie changed a few times a day ,sqeaky bum time for a few .
scapaflow says:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
I think people sometimes forget that.
There are people who actually own RIFC PLC, it is their business, it owns a Ltd Co which operates a football club.
The people who own the PLC have a board in place to run their business for them.
It is up to them to do what they want with the business they bought. If anyone doesn’t like that they can offer to buy it from them. If anyone in the business doesn’t like the way it is going they can try to vote their own people onto the board.
It really is that simple.
Test
StevieBC says: (873)
November 5, 2013 at 5:20 pm
=========================
For the Evening Times even to consider printing that is cringeworthy and embarrassing. To actually print it and not tear it apart as utter nonsense is a dereliction of duty on their part.
Tif Finn says: (695)
November 5, 2013 at 6:28 pm
==========================
Spot on – it is as simple as that. Somehow though they seem to think they can bully their way in for nothing, helped by pathetic apologies for journalists.
Tif Finn /UTH
That is what normally happens in business ,my worry is that normal business practises seem to be a stranger in this saga .
nowoldandgrumpy says: (742)
November 5, 2013 at 5:58 pm
7 1 Rate This
Regans response here is incredible. Total incompetence.
Peter @macbloscaidh 2h
Memo to any football club owing tax & wanting to play in Europe. Disagree with the bill, you’ll get your licence.
http://i.imgur.com/lLI8xpj.jpg
=========
amazed people think that is a real twitter account
😆
nowoldandgrumpy
You should take that link to Auldheid ,looks like Regans clutching at straws .
CW was supposedly questioning the penalties on the bill not the bill itself
OH DEAR ,STUART ,looks like you may be getting called into CO office after that clanger
taxman cometh
if not ……. 😳 😳 😳 🙄
JustEddie @edwardrice1 2h
@MattLindsayET “When I bought a quarter of Man United…” you left out “for other people”. You give impres’ that he bought for himself
Reply
Delete
Favorite
More
Expand
Matthew Lindsay @MattLindsayET 1h
@edwardrice1 It was a direct quote from Malcolm Murray.
Succulent Lamb anyone?
taxman cometh says: (102)
November 5, 2013 at 6:56 pm
2
0
Rate This
Quantcast
nowoldandgrumpy says: (742)
November 5, 2013 at 5:58 pm
7 1 Rate This
Regans response here is incredible. Total incompetence.
Peter @macbloscaidh 2h
Memo to any football club owing tax & wanting to play in Europe. Disagree with the bill, you’ll get your licence.
http://i.imgur.com/lLI8xpj.jpg
=========
That tweet was from last year, as with the “bill not crystalised” tweet to myself they have all been deleted.
taxman cometh says:
==============================
I hope it’s not real, because if it is then Mr Reagan seems to think that HMRC, the UK’s tax collecting authority (responsible for collecting tax, enforcing debt, and prosecuting criminal evaders) sending you an assessment for outstanding tax is the equivalent of getting an invoice for some face painting.
Disagreeing a tax assessment and questioning an invoice really aren’t the same thing.
Tif Finn says: (695)
November 5, 2013 at 6:28 pm
Exactly.
If the Requistioners are so sure of their ground, why did they not persist with the EGM? It can’t have been the cost of having one, as Malcolm & Paul Murray have been telling anyone that will listen, that a High Net Worth Ranger’s fan is willing to cover the AGM costs.
This all looks like a game of liars dice, only I’ don’t think the current owners of RIFC are bluffing…
scapaflow says:
—————————————–
They hardly need to bluff.
They could already have transferred all of the assets and can do it any time to satisfy debt of what must be somewhere near £20m just now.
They could place the PLC into voluntary liquidation anytime they wanted and dispose of those assets to anyone they want. Distributing the proceeds amongst the shareholders.
They basically have all of the cards, and even if they lose control of the board they hold such a large proportion of the shares they will have a massive influence on everything that happens going forward. In fact as someone suggested (possibly neephead) if someone controls about 32% of the shares then they really control the business.
Hugh Keevins is an absolute ignorant arse of a man and delahunt is pathetic for not halting his abuse of callers, Sean well done you ripped him a new one 😀
scapaflow
MM said on Talksport that they could force an GM but they did not want to cost the club money .
I found that absurd ,if they thought peepil were deliberately delaying an AGM whilst filling their pockets with money ,surely the sooner they forced a GM the better
As I and others have said.
Something stinks to high heavens here
Also I think I saw a piece where DK said it could take another year to sort the mess out ,would that mean Sevco could be passed to the peepil when they reached the SPFL ( were IMO the peepil originally sounded out expected to be when they took over
off to watch the footie 😯 😯
Fergus
Mr Malcolm Murray in yesterday’s Evening Times speaking about AGM costs:
“”That forces the club to do it. If the club are thinking it is venues and costs there is a very rich fan who has offered to stage the thing at any of Glasgow’s major venues of which there are many, the new Hydro, the SECC.”
Something smells here
fergusslayedtheblues says
=================================
I think it was Paul Murray who said that there were wealthy fans willing to pay for it, so it wouldn’t cost the club anything. I believe that is perfectly legitimate in the circumstances where a group calls an EGM but the PLC says they can’t afford it. The group can pay the expenses themselves. Fans paying for the AGM would be no different. Though it would be an admission of penury.
Bottom line, the people running the club are procrastinating. The people requisitioning change are doing little or nothing about that other than make some noise.
In other considerations. Who do Paul Murray and Dave King actually think they are, they were both directors of the club that died and as such part of that demise. They currently have no shares in the PLC they are trying to get control of. Malcolm Murray was brought in by Charles Green and was a high profile part of his regime. It seems to me he did little or nothing to prevent the carnage which seems to have gone on, in spite of being Chairman and a very experienced businessman. Jim McColl is a billionaire (allegedly) who has already said he wouldn’t be putting a lot of cash in.
They all stood back as Murray sold to Whyte and as Green bought the assets and created a new club with them. These are now the heroes who will save Rangers … really.
Apologies if previously posted but couldn’t see it
CharlottesReprisal @CharlotteFakes4 21h
@CharlotteFakes @CharlotteFakes3
WATP Malcolm misleading the fans and following Celtic.
http://i.imgur.com/f9vKVNj.jpg v http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/3966-season-tickets-price-freeze …
iamacant says:
Rangers Interim Chief Executive Craig Mather commented: “The Board is delighted to confirm season ticket prices for next season will be frozen.
—————————————————————–
Delighted my 4r53.
Tif Finn says: (699)
November 5, 2013 at 8:39 pm
The Poppy shirts are more his sort of philanthropy….
I wrote to Head of Sport ,Radio Scotland, on 29th October ( see my post of 4.29 pm on that day).
This is the reply I received today: ( still haven’t found out how to post it on here like an attachment or link, so I’ve had to type it out!)
”
[BBC Scotland letterhead (etc)]
04/11/2013
Dear Mr……….
Thank you for your follow-up letter of October 29th regarding my response to your original complaint about comments made by Chick Young on the Sportsound programme broadcast on October 16th.
Chick Young was wrong in his interpretation of the settlement agreed in relation to Dave King’s infringements of the South African Income Tax Act. He had mistakenly thought that the position arrived at did not result in criminal convictions for Mr King. In actual fact the plea and sentence agreement saw any fraud charges dropped but a guilty verdict and fines applied to a range of tax evasion charges. This was, however, more than adequately addressed on air by Tom English and I do not believe that any listeners would have been left in any doubt as to the true state of affairs.
Yours sincerely,
Ewan D Angus,
Commissioning Editor, Television
& Head of Sport ”
————-
It’s a pretty poor show when it appears to be acceptable to Angus that one of his paid employees is so blatantly ill-informed as to be need correcting by a press journalist!
The degree to which Chick’s was an ‘honest’ mistake will be for each of us to judge in the light of our experience of him.
john clarke says: (1329)
November 5, 2013 at 8:53 pm
Good effort, John
Question: Where does sports journalism end, and sports infotainment begin?
Answer: In the vacuum between Chico’s ears.
john clarke says: (1329)
November 5, 2013 at 8:53 pm
==========================
Chick Young was not accepting at all that night any form of correction by Tom English. So hysterical was his response Tom English was almost becoming lost for words. The way that show was left it was very much one man’s word against another, and the BBC have done nothing to point out the facts.
scapaflow says:
=========================
If I have read this story correctly they are selling a top which has a poppy included on it. To coincide with Remembrance Sunday.
For every one they sell they will donate £5 to poppy Scotland.
They are selling this top at the normal price + £5.
Is that about the size of it, they are basically using the poppy appeal as an advertising gimmick and will make their normal profit from each top sold.
Sorry if I picked that up wrong, it does seem a bit off.
john clarke says:
========================
Good effort.
Can I just add that, at least in this country, criminal tax evasion (which is what he pled guilty to) is in fact fraud.
So to say that someone was convicted of tax evasion but not fraud is kind of a non sequitur.
For example, criminal evasion of VAT is covered by S72 of the VAT Act 1994
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1994/23/section/72
72 Offences.
(1)If any person is knowingly concerned in, or in the taking of steps with a view to, the fraudulent evasion of VAT by him or any other person, he shall be liable—
(a)on summary conviction, to a penalty of the statutory maximum or of three times the amount of the VAT, whichever is the greater, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to both; or
(b)on conviction on indictment, to a penalty of any amount or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years or to both.
====================================
Fraud requires, in essence, a deceit, a victim and a tangible result. So someone rendering a false return to HMRC fulfills those requirements. They lied, the victim was the country, and the tangible result was under-paying their tax.
======================================
The Taxes Management Act for Income Tax is not that different.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/8/schedule/7/part/16
106AOffence of fraudulent evasion of income tax
(1)A person commits an offence if that person is knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of income tax by that or any other person.
(2)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable—
(a)on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or both, or
(b)on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years or a fine, or both.
=======================================================
I’m afraid that, unless things are substantially different in South Africa Mr King was in fact involved in Fraud. The wording of the offence may be different but the principle is the same. He lied, the Government lost a load of money because of his lies.
These people are just twisting words. Spinning if you will.
john clarke says: (1329)
November 5, 2013 at 8:53 pm
…………………………………
It’s another poor attempt by the BBC to agree but not be seen to either take sides or awakening the hoardes into a protest or a cascade of angry intimidating threats..
The BBC just can’t call it how it is…for fear…which is a sad state of affairs..
green hornet
5 Nov 2013, 01:31 PM
SFA tweeted games played 30/31st November , dunno if they are being funny
mostly likely incompetence as per.
Tif Finn says: (701)
November 5, 2013 at 9:09 pm
You got it right. Philanthropy the Rangers way:
You can imagine the “board” discussion:
“Free publicity? check”
“Company profit margin unaffected? check”
“Mugs, sorry fans, picking up the costs? check”
“World record levels of hypocrisy? check”
fergusslayedtheblues says: (192)
November 5, 2013 at 7:50 pm
4 0 Rate This
scapaflow
MM said on Talksport that they could force an GM but they did not want to cost the club money .
I found that absurd ,if they thought peepil were deliberately delaying an AGM whilst filling their pockets with money ,surely the sooner they forced a GM the better
As I and others have said.
Something stinks to high heavens here
Also I think I saw a piece where DK said it could take another year to sort the mess out ,would that mean Sevco could be passed to the peepil when they reached the SPFL ( were IMO the peepil originally sounded out expected to be when they took over
======
Absurd yes but then you remember the smoke mirrors and squirrels
All are playing their parts
to what end i don’t know
A bit of light relief and well OT. Its probably already been shown but what the heck. EL Tel of Inverness having a laugh
https://twitter.com/TerryButcher_/status/385037529827008512
MercDoc says: (6)
November 5, 2013 at 10:30 pm
He’s getting in the right frame of mind for Easter Road….
Must be fake, El Tel wouldn’t say that, Would he?
or would he! ( Vincent Price laughing in the background) 😈
MercDoc says: (8)
November 5, 2013 at 10:41 pm
He says himself that his wife gave him a real reality check about the WATP bullshit he bought into while at Rangers
JC
It’s a pretty poor show when it appears to be acceptable to Angus that one of his paid employees is so blatantly ill-informed as to be need correcting by a press journalist!
The degree to which Chick’s was an ‘honest’ mistake will be for each of us to judge in the light of our experience of him.
——————————————————————————————————–
You could argue that Scottish football is lucky to have a show where such a keen debate representing two very different views is alllowed. There are so many other much more important matters that go relatively unchallanged in the media as the corporate and politcal gradually ‘merge’ with the fourth estate.
The Terry Bugner photo must be a spoof, too many pennies for a start.
Some irate sevconians responding to it anyway, good ole “bear on bear action”.
WATP Maclom ….ex (I’m not pished).
Greenock Jack says: (156)
November 5, 2013 at 10:54 pm
Sorry Jack, that’s where you lose me. There is a silly idea going around that in the interests of “balance” all views, no matter how factually incorrect or just plain nutty, deserve the same air time. As the BBC exec made clear in his letter, Chick Young wasn’t giving a different view, he was at variance with the facts, being economical with the actualité, in error, talking bullshit.
The one thing he was most definitely not doing was offering a different view on a matter of opinion.
neepheid says:
November 5, 2013 at 11:07 am
I’m a bit mystified by this AGM delay business. It seems to me that the current Board have the votes to carry the day, so why not get it over with? Of course it will be VERY unpleasant, whenever it takes place, but I wouldn’t have thought that would bother either of the current directors.
Is the lock-in really relevant? Surely nothing that happens at the AGM can stop the spivs selling up when it suits them? I doubt if any sales will be on the open market, by the way. I’m guessing that the deals are already in place.
=============================================================
I’m mystified as well. I’m no Accountant, Lawyer or HMRC expert, but if I’ve got this right the AGM will take place after all those “Penny” shares are offloaded? After all the protaganists have jumped into their lifeboats and sailed across the Channel to their nice new Chateaux’s in France, not far from SDM.
Surely alarm bells must be ringing amongst various parties like AIM, Fraud Office, Scottish Government, Westminster Government, SFA, SPFL, HMRC, RFC Supporters, Police, in fact anyone concerned!!!!!!!!!
Is there not a mechanism in this Country that can suspend dealings immediately whilst a Full Investigation is carried out as to what is going on there?
That’s a serious question, as I believe a lot of dodgy dealings are going on underneath the radar. I would hope some serious monitoring is going on from some of the parties I have named above. Somehow, I think they all are turning a blind eye to one of the most disgraceful episodes in Scottish Football History!
Whilst I’m on, charging £49.99 for a shirt whilst promising to give £5 for every shirt to The Poppy Appeal?
That just about sums it up for me with this crowd! Can they sink any lower? Why not just give a Donation like everyone else, seeing as they are the Champions of our Armed Services, well they do invite them every year onto the pitch?
If they are the great Champions of Our Armed Services, wouldn’t it be a great gesture if instead of £5 from every shirt sold, they made the magnanimous gesture of declaring:
“For every shirt sold at £49.99, Rangers will donate £44.99 to the Poppy Appeal!”
After all, they are a Club without debt, are they not?
In the very month of Remembrance, I think a very substantial Rangers support worldwide will be very embarrassed by this Cheap Trick!
And so they should be!
DISGRACEFUL!
Greenock Jack on November 5, 2013 at 10:54 pm
Even for your goodself, thats not good enough – how can it be a good idea that in order to have a balanced debate on public broadcast, one side of the ‘balance’ should be wrong. And not just wrong wrong but the type of wrong that is very close to be misleadingly wrong. A lie in fact. As i think events have borne out. GJ must keep trying harder!
Scapa
This blog has CY down as a bufoon and the Scottish sports media being generally out of their depth on this ongoing saga.
Was CY convinced of something he had been told and he thought to be correct or was he deliberately trying to mislead ? The way it came over I think it was the former.
The programme had another journalist with a different (sources of) interpretation and therefore the format worked and was in a certain way entertaining to boot.
Had they been lawyers, journalists more familiar with the subject or even considerably more intelligent then accountability may have been more of an issue.
Greenock Jack says: (157)
November 5, 2013 at 11:24 pm
Your response reminded me of a joke Jim Sillars tells about his time in Parliament as MP for Govan. He was lambasting the Scottish secretary for having a ministerial team full of fanatics and fools. After the debate, Lord James Douglas Hamilton (junior Scottish Office minister) came up to him and said ” But Jim, I have never been a fanatic!”
Chico is both a fanatic and a fool, as well as being an embarrassment to the BBC and a drain on my licence money…
Sqiggle
The request/complaint you really need to make to the BBC is to have journalists qualified in the necessary material to cover such a story. Sports journalists covering the Rangers saga has been a circus in itself.
I watched a Glen Greenwald video tonight and tbh I can’t take Chick Young and this complaint too seriously.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edOYR79pL-w
Greenock Jack says: (158)
November 5, 2013 at 11:36 pm
Fair point. However, it is one of the funnier ironies of this saga, that the entity most damaged by having idiots like Chick Young, Jim Traynor, Keith Jackson & Hugh Keevins cover the story, is the Mighty Glasgow Rangers. Had the media turned the story over to proper journalists, instead of allowing these clowns to try and protect Rangers, I doubt the club/company would be in quite as much doodoo as it is at the moment.
With friends like these, you really don’t need enemies….
Greenock Jack says:
November 5, 2013 at 10:54 pm
JC
It’s a pretty poor show when it appears to be acceptable to Angus that one of his paid employees is so blatantly ill-informed as to be need correcting by a press journalist!
The degree to which Chick’s was an ‘honest’ mistake will be for each of us to judge in the light of our experience of him.
——————————————————————————————————–
You could argue that Scottish football is lucky to have a show where such a keen debate representing two very different views is alllowed. There are so many other much more important matters that go relatively unchallanged in the media as the corporate and politcal gradually ‘merge’ with the fourth estate.
===============================================
Jack,
It is not a “Show” we’re “lucky” to have! It’s a show that we are given by The National Broadcasting Corporation of Our Country.
In fact, ever since Mr Young’s “tete-a-tete” with Tom English, and after many complaints to The BBC, Mr Young disappeared for a week, and has been only heard on Radio as a Touchline Commentator since then. That’s where he should be at the moment, not spouting pro David King and Paul Murray propaganda in a reasonable debate!
He’s a BBC Employee, paid a good wage. Therefore he should be neutral and Non-Biased. Unfortunately, he can’t keep his trap shut and consistently drops himself in it, especially when being wound up. That’s when his true colours come out!
The guy is an idiot to himself, and certainly does not contribute a “different view”
e.g.
He also writes for some paper. Has anyone ever read his criticism of SDM and SDM’s part in Rangers Downfall?
Nah! Didn’t think so! Neither have I!
The guy is a sychophant who has made a good living on Scottish Football without really contributing anything towards it. You can add Traynor, Jackson, Leckie, etc to that list. A bunch of parasites!
I bet none of them could hit a closed Barn Door from the Penalty Spot?
Whether Chas Dung was attemptig to deliberately mis-lead or had been ill-informed and was genuine in his protestaions is not the issue. He will be the only one who can answer that question (lets not mention conscience). The issue is that he was factually incorrect, not only that but his protestations would lead many to believe that his was the accurate representation.
Everyone on here knows this to be false. That is not in dispute. However, the broadcaster has a responsibility to correct factual inaccuracies. That has not happened.
Therefore those listeners who left that show happy in the knowledge that, once more, certain elements of the MSM are simply out to besmirch Sevco Scotland Ltd and those wishing to use it as a money-shredder are none the wiser. Until a retraction or ‘adjustment of previously reported ‘facts’ ‘ is aired these people are still mis-informed. Badly.
And, Mr MortonJock, we come back to the crux of your compadres problems. Mis-information being spread, intentionally or otherwise, by a ‘trusted’ MSM source.
Someone of your intelligence, wit and football leanings should be contacting BBC SportScotland to demand that the facts are reported. Yes, FACTS.
This is supposed to be your fight, not ours (Scottish Football’s). If, as claimed, YOU want YOUR club back YOU need to demand better journalism. It may be the case that we are a bunch of pedants who are mostly riled at inaccuracies. But these inaccuracies* are what led RangersFC to the liquidation cliff and subsequent oblivion.
These new inaccuracies* are what is leading the fans along the same, recently trudged path. Along the way there have been many signposts warning of ‘sudden drop’, ‘cliff edge approaching’ etc etc. Unfortunately the ‘authority’ who placed said signs were deemed to be ‘full o sh!t’.
The power to demand better, accurate reporting is in your fingertips Jack. Aim your weapons where they need to be pointing.
*Lies
Greenock Jack says:
November 5, 2013 at 11:24 pm
===============================
Jack,
What’s your take on Sir David Murray? You haven’t said too much about him.
Just interested in your opinion?
Why do you think he has been quiet for 2 years?
Seriously, I’m really interested from your viewpoint as to the role SDM played.
Was he duped?
fergussingstheblues says: (71)
November 5, 2013 at 11:57 pm
…………………………………..
The same Chic who whilst performing his BBC duties stated at a midweek league game between St. Johnstone and Rangers (IL) a few years ago announced on radio there is a possibility rangers could be heading for administration…
He subsequently confirmed later that he had been summoned by SDM because of his comment….funny enough he suddenly back tracked on the admin quote….and there was me thinking he worked for the BBC?
fergussingstheblues says: (72)
November 6, 2013 at 12:15 am
________________________________________
I’ll take this one Jackie boy, (take a wee bit heat off him cos the puir wee bugger does get it pretty tight!!)
Jack is on the record as saying that Minty should be shouldering a larger chunk of the blame. And that the club would never have plumbed such depths had the moonbeam meastro not splashed OPM with such wild, reckless, carefree abandon.
I believe he also stated (correct me if I’m wrong) that fresh-breathed one should face charges should it be proven he was involved in criminal activity.
Paulmac2 says: (772)
November 6, 2013 at 12:17 am
fergussingstheblues says: (71)
November 5, 2013 at 11:57 pm
…………………………………..
The same Chic who whilst performing his BBC duties stated at a midweek league game between St. Johnstone and Rangers (IL) a few years ago announced on radio there is a possibility rangers could be heading for administration…
He subsequently confirmed later that he had been summoned by SDM because of his comment….funny enough he suddenly back tracked on the admin quote….and there was me thinking he worked for the BBC?
===================================
Paul,
You forgot to mention the effects a nice Succulent Lamb and a Fine French Wine can have on you?
The odd thing about the BBC response to John Clarke is…they suggest that what was being debated was opinion…and that because Tom English was there offering an alternative opinion it was somehow acceptable?
Wrong…Tom English presented legal fact…Chic Young tried to present as fact either what he had been told to say or what he thought he could get away with…how can the BBC suggest this is acceptable from a BBC employee?
What am I thinking…this is Chic Young we are talking of…the man who argued live on air with a fellow journalist as to who was the biggest Rangers (IL) Cheer leader!
I’d like to add, quite categorically, that I do not know GJ, endorse his views nor share them (that I know of!).
Jack
This blog often has threads where the consensus is found to be flawed, but make no mistake, Chic Young IS a buffon. He is also either a liar or an even bigger fool than we thought him.
Remember Campbell Ogilvie’s Big Night Out where Young first insisted that CO was NOT a recipient of an EBT, then forced to backtrack with the rider that the amount was hardly enough to stand him a round in the Honours Three – only to look irretrievably idiotic when Mark Daly uncovered that the “round” had cost £90K. Is that the work of a fool or a liar? It certainly wasn’t an opinion. On both counts, he relayed (as facts) information which was wholly untrue.
On the DK thing, again, for most of us who are up to Dick & Dora standard, a quick glance at the written reports on King’s “little bit of bother” would be enough to ascertain that he had been convicted of criminal charges. Richard Wilson’s rather bizarre assertion that these were “minor” despite costing £46m in fines was a matter of opinion, no matter how amoral it seemed, but Chic’s denial of the truth was a matter of pathological denial. It was just a lie – or a misunderstanding from someone who never got to grips with D&D. Either way, this halfwit, (who has with ironic hindsight turned out to be the real idiot half of the partnership from which “Chirpy Chirpy Cheep Cheep” sprung forth) has, at public expense, held on to a position of some prestige at the BBC. The same BBC he cavorted around singing “nah nah nah nah nah!!” in the faces of colleagues who were not in receipt of the piece of paper he brandished – David Murray’s 40th birthday party RSVP. This is a guy who stands on the shoulders of intellectual pygmies for a better view of the world.
A massive figure of fun amongst those colleagues who have a fondness for him, an even bigger figure of ridicule and contempt for those who have little of that fondness, Chic is systematically misinforming his captive audience on a whole range of matters that we know about. The only thing that is a matter of opinion is whether he is lying deliberately, or simply a slave to a braincell count barely in double figures.
I used to be of the opinion that he was harmless, but by spouting untruths he is doing massive damage to the reputation of the BBC, the journalistic profession, and my arterial walls.
His cronyism on the CO thing should have been enough to see him given his jotters. His outburst over King last week should have seen him institutionalised.
Chic only has “opinions” when somebody gives him one. David Murray, Campbell Ogilvie, Walter Smith (despite his hideous verbal assault on Chico in the tunnel at Ibrox in 1995), Ally McCoist. Craig Whyte, Charles Green – they’ve all told him his opinion. His job over the last few years has been to mouth (I hesitate to use the word articulate) THEIR opinions. It really is no longer funny. Young is a total innocent abroad, but an insult to those of us who are used to thought, however fleeting or vacuous.
causaludendi says: (64)
November 6, 2013 at 12:29 am
fergussingstheblues says: (72)
November 6, 2013 at 12:15 am
________________________________________
I’ll take this one Jackie boy, (take a wee bit heat off him cos the puir wee bugger does get it pretty tight!!)
Jack is on the record as saying that Minty should be shouldering a larger chunk of the blame. And that the club would never have plumbed such depths had the moonbeam meastro not splashed OPM with such wild, reckless, carefree abandon.
I believe he also stated (correct me if I’m wrong) that fresh-breathed one should face charges should it be proven he was involved in criminal activity.
=================================
Scary!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Are you and GreenockJack Jeckyll and Hyde?
No disrespect, but I’d rather Jack spoke for himself.
So Jack, again, what are your thoughts on SDM?
Balance is a wonderful thing.
There are times you need it.
Like walking on a tight rope, carrrying a tray full of beers, eating healthy (I’m told), negotiating with the missus / weans, discussing the finer points of a contentious refereeing decision.
There are times when it is a social responsibility.
Like reporting the news in an impartial manner to the license paying public (I know!), dispensing justice in a court of law or providing the weans with a proper edumacation.
There are other times when balance is simply not required.
The Earth is not flat. No balanced argument required.
Evolution is real. Yup. We used to be monkeys – get over it.
Elvis has left the building for good and Armstrong did land on the moon. Really not up for debate.
There are times when presenting a ‘balanced’ argument is actually an act of cowardice, or, worse, an attempt to impose an agenda by providing the appearance of legitimacy to an argument that is, in reality, absurd.
And this is how the BBC (and SMSM) covers the Rangers story. Time after time after time.
TSFM may seem like a cold house for Rangers fans at times. At least part of the reason for this is that we try to cut through the MSM manure and tell it like it is. Unfortunately, this is such a radical departure from what they are being drip fed by the meedja that I’m sure it comes across as very confrontational.
Sorry. I doubt many here intend any offense.
However, there are aspects of this story for which there is no rational counter argument (no matter what you might hear in the meedja).
e.g. Rangers died and are in the process of being buried through the liquidation process.
e.g. Dave King is a convicted criminal.
e.g. SDM was not duped.
FSTB, Oh to have an alter-ego such as the Cappielow crusader!
But ‘fraid not old bean, just little ol ‘me on ma tod feeling empathetic to those who seem to be getting it from all angles, even if I don’t agree with ’em! (cast your mind back to your ‘sayonara speech’…?!)
[EDIT to add: I ain’t your TD’er!)