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!
Incorporation
Definition
Method by which individuals are voluntarily united into a new entity through the creation of an artificial, intangible, and legal person called corporation.
Name of insured:-
Before incorporation:-
The Trustees of the Wheeltappers and Shunters Football Club.
After Incorporation:-
The Wheeltappers and Shunters Football Club Ltd
One single legal entity.
😀
Re Neepheid, I would be very sad to see him leave in frustration. I hope his glass looks half full by now and that he will continue to give us the benefit of his insight.
To be honest, the Old Club New Club argument is becoming tiresome. I personally don’t think it is a particularly important issue, and I think that some of our posters get themselves into an unnecessary lather over it. I am not saying that the OLD/NEW club argument is not important at all (and just because I’m not bothered either way doesn’t mean others need to get in line) , just that it is becoming an increasingly shrill and distracting sideshow.
Recently, some people were even telling poor Ryan G that he has no right to regard TRFC as Rangers – even though he admits that they are a new club. I think if it happened to Celtic, I’d readily admit that we were a new club which carried on the traditions of the old. I’d be happy to admit that the next trophy we won was the first – but I’d be damned if I wasn’t allowed to continue to celebrate McGrory, John Thomson, Lisbon and Milan and Seville, or NIAR or the 79 league decider.
Rangers ARE a new club, but it seems an extreme form of Brand Nazism to deny their fans their own history – even if it isn’t technically the history of the new club.
Additionally, perception is of utmost importance here. TRFC fans will insist forevermore that they are the old club. EVERYONE else will insist otherwise – whatever the SFA or anyone else says about it. As Neepheid says, it is a huge squirrel, and of exponentially lesser import than seeing to it that some kind of justice and integrity is restored to the game. Winning the OLD/NEW club argument, whilst of totemic significance, will not change one jot of the stitch up that takes place systematically at Hampden and elsewhere around the football landscape.
I am not against people getting involved in the argument, nor do I have any wish to deny it air to breathe, but the endless list of recycled analogies trotted out to an audience which is almost 100% converted seems a waste of energy. Neepheid is I think correct when he says that the argument is blinding us to the big picture.
On the bright side, real news will probably restore a bit of balance to the arguments here. Usually does.
TSFM – well said on every point.
Neepheid,
Come back please! There are still a lot of unanswered questions out there. We have to keep digging and reminding!
I know you don’t like the oldco/ newco argument, but it is an important factor in the overall story over the last 2 years. As is:
1. Sir Minty’s involvement
2. Ogilvies involvement
3. Whytes involvement
4. Greens involvement
5. Duff & Phelps involvement
6. McCoist & Smiths involvement
7. Lord’s Nimmo-Smith & Hodges involvement
8. Alex Salmonds involvement
9. Stockbridge, Ahmed, Mather, King, Murray (Paul &Malcolm variety), Easdale(s),The Singapore guy wanted by Interpol – all their involvement.
10. MSM’s involvement
11. Almost forgot, The SFA’s involvement, along with the SPFL, SPL, SFL.
You could probably add another 100 to that list?
I hope things are beginning to heat up now in the lead up to Xmas!
I’ve also got a feeling that Slippery Mr Irvine is beginning to lose his Teflon Coated appeal to the Average Bear. I think they are beginning to see through him now. Even they are asking questions!
The next month is going to be very interesting indeed!
Can’t wait! Neepheid, I know you will be back! You won’t be able to resist it.
TSFM says: (554)
November 19, 2013 at 10:36 pm
“Rangers ARE a new club, but it seems an extreme form of Brand Nazism to deny their fans their own history – even if it isn’t technically the history of the new club.”
—————
I’ve never heard the expression before, so I’m not sure sure what you mean by “Brand Nazism”, but I take it as non-complimentary.
“Rangers ARE a new club”, you say, so the history is absolutely not the history of the new club, nothing technical about it.
Can you give some examples of anybody on here denying RFC their history? I don’t remember any, but that’s no guide. I get the feeling you’re over-inflating the baw.
Enough said. The forecast’s not too bad for tomorrow.
Lets settle this Old Club / New club argument once and for all
Lets agree that the reality is that a new club has been formed which plays at Ibrox. The fans of this new club want to adopt the history of the club that used to play there
Lets move the debate on to whether this adopted history is simply of the good bits that are worth being proud of or whether it also includes the disgusting bits that would have been strangled at birth all those years ago if the governing authorities had any backbone
Because it seems to me that the only common ground that might be possible is between all of us and the TRFC fans who loved the good bits and hated the bad bits of the club that died last year
TSFM says: (554)
November 19, 2013 at 10:36 pm
“- even if it isn’t technically the history of the new club”
———————————————————————-
You seem to have gone into Spiers mode. There’s no ‘technically’ about it. (Look up the definition of the word in the dictionary). Either the history is part of the new club or it died with the liquidation of the old one. It’s as simple as that. Next we will be talking about the 1872 club dying as being “not proven”.
Otherwise, TSFM, an excellent post.
willmacufree says: (234)
November 19, 2013 at 6:00 pm
The Cat NR1 says @ 1.10 pm
“…..Fixed assets held at business cessations are of surprisingly little value and that value often bears no relation to the value to the business as a going concern.”
Thanks to The Cat NR1 for his response, part quoted above, to my question @ 11.43am. I’m sorry I took so long to get back. As you’ve guessed my concern is that we’ll see an individualistic liquidation similar to the eccentric administration we have already witnessed, although I’m glad you think this won’t happen.
The assets in question must surely rate a value of ca. £30 m? I thought going concern values don’t enter the equation. Isn’t that where the admin went haywire? Incidentally have you calculated the newclub/new co debt cover ratio?
Maybe I’m up a gum tree right enough and this has all been done. If so, sorry folks.
_________________________________________________________________________
Assuming that the RIFC PLC group have unencumbered ownership of the properties, in the event of a liquidation who would be interested in purchasing the properties and why? Option 1 could be a Newco football club. I think we’ve already been there and it would have had to have ended in failure for the hypothetical liquidation to be taking place in the first place. The same assets were purchased for a couple of million quid following the failure of the original club, so how much would they get next time? Option 2 could be for a property investor to purchase the assets and then lease them to a Newco football club. If the hypothetical liquidation occured after the assets had been purchased for a couple of miilion, how much rent would be forthcoming and how much would someone pay to secure the opportunity to receive that rent? The cost of repairs and eventual replacement of life-expired stands etc would need to be factored in. Option 3 could be use for a different sport such as rugby or American Football., where a long-term project could lead to a successful and profitable future outcome. That would require a Brian Kennedy type entrepreneur to stump up how much to get it going as borringing in that situation would be extremely difficult? Option 4 could be some form of pseudo nationalisation and use as community facility or whatever. Mind you how much spare cash is there for that and the ongoing maintenance costs? That leaves option 5. The unthinkable cessation of use for sport and redevelopment for alternative use.
The Murray Park site could perhaps be worth a fair amount with development planning permission. That would require a significant change of planning policy though. Is there a restrictive covenant or mortgage in place too? Otherwise it could have value as a sports/hotel complex although the economy isn’t in the right shape for that at the moment. It could be purchased as an investment with a view to future easing of planning restrictions, but how much would hope value add to the sale proceeds? Having seen the ongoing investment in infrastucture and facilties in the area around Celtic Park, it may be that something could happen in the area around Ibrox stadium that could make the land occupied by the stadium of interest to developers. The listed main stand could be incorporated in the same way that the listed stands at Highbury were used in the redevelopment of that site for housing. However, it could just as easily end up neglected and forlorn like Cathkin Park despite all the efforts made to redevelop that ground by those involved in the demise of Thirds.
£30M or £3.5M? Why pay £30M when other sites are likely to be available for less? But it should also be considered that property and land prices in that area could be depressed due to the fortnightly influx of circa 40,000 football fans. If that disruption to daily routine is taken away, is there a possibility of profitably building something to take advantage of the decent transport links and possible additional local development? Would planning permission be forthcoming though (back to Cathkin Park again)? Whichever way you look at it, the value is nowhere near the figure on the balance sheet and it could actually be as low as nil.
This is where the MSN get to say UEFA have recognised Rangers as the same club. I can’t be bothered searching but I remember quotes from this organisation saying they had spoke to SFA and they had confirmed that it was the same club.
I know this will generate a lot of thumbs down but this is where they get it from. I’m just reminding you all. It’s strange you all appear to have forgot about this. I’ve noticed you lot don’t like anyone going against the acknowledged TSFM wisdom on certain matters.
http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/205975-european-clubs-body-downgrades-rangers-status-but-recognises-history/
RyanGosling says: (95)
November 19, 2013 at 8:33 pm
“Neepheid,
You and I probably share very few common viewpoints. ”
————————-
A wee heartwarming moment of magnanimity. We’re all capable of feeling each others pain and I suspect Ryan has felt more than most. This is probably what TSFM was designed for; to bring supporters together even when others might attempt to drive them apart.
The rhetoric can become a bit numbing and descend into mantra and eventually dogma. Its a bit like whistling in the dark to convince yourself that you’re not alone. Perhaps neepheid needs to plunge his turnip in a bucket of cold water just to cool his bunnet.
I wanted to write a pretentious piece on the wave particle duality theory of light; so I think I will. Scientists can’t quite be sure if light is a wave form or a stream of particles. They’ve pondered it for decades and have built the large hadron collider to further investigate (apologies to any real scientists reading who will spot this is guff). To further split analogies, it reminds me of the super computer ‘Deep Thought’ from ‘Hitch-hiker’s guide to the galaxy’ that was built to answer the question about life, the universe and everything…. After millions of years it delivered the rather unsatisfactory response 42.
Sometimes its the same Rangers, other times its a new Rangers. The perception is skewed by the observer. However all the observers are unlikely to agree on the observations. There is no definitive answer that will satisfy everyone. If that doesn’t have you fumbling for the nearest wrist slitting implement then you have more perseverance than many.
So TSFM currently is analogous to the large hadron collider. Stuff spins round and round and is broken apart and the fragments are examined to see if there is a deeper truth embedded within. We probably become gradually more knowledgeable but it will only be through time that any particular theory becomes useful.
Watching a circular argument revolve continuously is a bit mundane even if fragments of real information are chipped off every so often. Science has always been like that; an awful lot of nothing interspersed with occasional moments of clarity. What is constant is the monitoring of events. Everything is now under scrutiny in a way it probably never was before.
The reason the new club/old club argument is exercised so much is that there is an underlying feeling of injustice. The only way the disenfranchised can register their disquiet is by prodding the hornets nest with a stick. The hornets thought their sting would keep intruders at bay but it has only acted as a provocation. If matters had been dealt with in a manner that could be seen as just then no stick poking would be taking place.
However this level of scrutiny has not existed until now. The authorities will be adjusting to a new reality and squirming in full view of anyone that cares to view them. Others will believe, ‘nothing to see here, move along…’. Two different perceptions existing at the same time in the same place.
In some ways the obsession is a protective cloak. Who in their right minds is going to read through thousands of mundane comments just to glean a few wee gems, unless they are obsessed. It provides a kind of anonymity; a smokescreen like what the spivs use. The ever present danger however is that somewhere in the confusion that moment of clarity will emerge just at the point some slimey individual least wishes it to.
Who guards the guards? We do.
@TSFM
Rangers history CONCLUDED in 2012.
Subsequently their history hasn’t gone anywhere.
However, despite Charlie “buying the titles” (not the way that SDM bought them) Rangers (1872) departed this earth in October 2012.
Quite simple really.
Whatsthescore
you dont know the score! The “european clubs body” is NOT UEFA, its the ECA, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Club_Association
TSFM says: (554)
November 19, 2013 at 10:36 pm
“Brand Nazism”
Lucky it’s your site, what an offensive arrogant term that is, to direct it to or apply it’s use while discussing any club or indeed a fan base in Scotland is reprehensible.
You should withdraw it immediately
paulsatim says: (638)
November 20, 2013 at 12:02 am
You haven’t read my post. I didn’t say I believed it or anything that could be interpreted as such. I said that is where MSM get it from. Now try reading and understanding in future before trying to get smart. 🙂
They were formed in 1967, which is slightly ironic given the generally stated reason for (S)DM’s behaviour at Sevco Scotland’s predecessor.
Also, they don’t appear to be claiming any world records, which is a bit of a let down.
There are still about 80 companies listed at Companies House starting with Sevco, of which a large number have been dissolved. It’s just a standard company formation agent’s name used until the last few years to set up off the shelf companies for bespoke namimg and onward sale. Nowadays, we do instant formations online so that kind of set-up is more or less redundant. Hence, the large number of dissolutions of unused companies. Many other companys set up as Sevcos (such as Sevco Scotland Ltd) will have been sold on having been renamed as part of the agent’s service.
Whatsthescore
Your post……….
This is where the MSN get to say UEFA have recognised Rangers as the same club. I can’t be bothered searching but I remember quotes from this organisation saying they had spoke to SFA and they had confirmed that it was the same club.
You dont mention ECA,
whatsthescore says: (8)
November 20, 2013 at 12:03 am
to defend TSFM (not that he/she needs it) – you are taking the phrase out of context, it was not referring to any club or fan base but in the context of overly strict interpretation of what forms a “Brand”. A brand in its loosest form is simply a form of known identification, so like it or not – a team in blue called rangers playing at Ibrox with the same fans can be called a continuation of the brand, I’ll leave the club/history thing alone. there is no winnable position there because of the authorities complete absence of ‘bottle’
The score, shirley, in time added on is NaewayCVA FC 0. HMRC 1
The studio pundits can debate all they like, but the record book never lies 😎
Further on my last post and to pick up on HirsutePursuit’s earlier post, it is apparent to me that the brand and ‘history’ of ‘rangers’ continues, as TSFM said the same people who care about them now will remember games they went to ‘then’ But the company/club argument is a hard fact, the company went into liquidation and can still be seen barely alive. The new company is in better condition (debatable) but they are different. As membership with SFA/SPFL/SFL resides with a club not companies, then it is crystal clear that there existed two clubs simultaneously and after all who played Brechin? that was before the ethereal transfer – so is the club that played Brechin the continuance or a one off practice club? so the company has died, the club died, a new company and club was formed but the ‘brand’ toxic or otherwise continues just as if someone brought out a new chocolate confectionary called a ‘marathon’ (and i’m not even going to comment on chickens and eggs) 😀
PhilMacGiollaBhain says: (173)
November 20, 2013 at 12:01 am
@TSFM
Rangers history CONCLUDED in 2012.
Subsequently their history hasn’t gone anywhere.
However, despite Charlie “buying the titles” (not the way that SDM bought them) Rangers (1872) departed this earth in October 2012.
Quite simple really.
________________________________________________________________________
I’d like to add a couple of slightly philosphical observations and questions, not specifically in response to Phil’s post, but the part above is something that I’ve been thinking about for a fair time now.
A starting point. History is just that. Things that have happened in the past. It can’t be transferred or bought.
However, in a years time will the history of RFC 2012 PLC be added to by a further year?
Did history stop at the final whistle of the last RFC game, at the instant liquidation was announced and the winding up order presented, or will it occur at the actual date of striking off at the conclusion of liquidation? Or at some other earlier point in time?
I suppose until the final liquidation takes place it may continue to add to the history, but like that of a patient in an unresponsive coma there will be nothing new entered in their diary. Did history only cease in 2012 in terms of on-field activity and the cessation of trading as a football club, the equivalent of entering the unresponsive coma. Surely to state otherwise would be to accept the myth of the ethereal and eternal club that can exist outside of its body corporate? Does RFC only die when RFC 2012 PLC dies as they are one and the same? The new Sevco Scotland Ltd (now TRFC Ltd) have started their own timeline from incorporation on 29 May 2012, so are the two now running parallel for a while, RFC and TRFC?
Phil takes October 2012 as the end, which is the point at which the administration process ended and liquidation started. I’m not so sure at the moment that we’ve actually got all the way to the end just yet.
The new club / old club argument, is not only still relevant, but extremely important
It lies right at the heart of the corruption in our game, and is/was the cause of all of the rule breaking, bending and invention that has taken place
In the interests of fair play and justice, it is an argument that must continue, until the team playing at Ibrox is legally and factually shown to be a new club
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, we have a CEO, just in time for the AGM
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail.html?announcementId=11779716
________________________________________________________________________
Company Rangers Int. Football Club PLC
TIDM RFC
Headline Appointment of CEO
Released 07:00 20-Nov-2013
Number 4648T07
RNS Number : 4648T
Rangers Int. Football Club PLC
20 November 2013
Rangers International Football Club plc
(“Rangers” or the “Company”)
Appointment of CEO
The Board of Rangers announces that it has appointed Graham Wallace as the Company’s new Chief Executive Officer with immediate effect.
Mr Wallace was employed by Manchester City Football Club, first as Chief Financial Officer (March 2009 – October 2010), and then as Chief Operating Officer (October 2010 – January 2013), during a period of unprecedented success in that club’s history. Whilst at Manchester City, Mr Wallace led the transformational changes in the business after the acquisition of the club by Abu Dhabi United Group, implementing world class business processes and corporate governance standards. Before joining Manchester City, Mr Wallace was Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of IMG Media, the global sports and entertainment media company, from October 2006 to March 2009.
Mr Wallace began his career at Ernst and Young where he qualified in 1986 as a Chartered Accountant. He then spent 20 years working in senior accounting and financial roles at oil company Conoco (now ConocoPhillips), Cable & Wireless and latterly as CFO of MTV Networks Europe.
Mr Wallace, originally from Dumfries, also has a degree in business management from Robert Gordon University.
In accordance with Rangers’ Articles of Association, Mr Wallace will be subject to re-appointment by an ordinary resolution at the upcoming Annual General Meeting of the Company on Thursday 19 December 2013.
Commenting on this appointment David Somers, Rangers’ independent non-executive director, and acting Chairman, said: “We are delighted to welcome Graham to the Board. His appointment is the successful culmination of a thorough and independent selection process which attracted a number of high calibre candidates. Graham’s previous success and his strong financial background in football will be beneficial to lead Rangers to continued future success”.
Graham Wallace added, “I am honoured to have been selected as CEO of Rangers. I am looking forward to meeting the challenges and leading the club to ensure that its off-pitch success matches the performance of the team.”
Further information concerning Mr Iain Graham Wallace, aged 52:
Current Partnerships and Directorships:
Marlborough Sports Media Ltd.
Past Directorships and other positions:
CSI Sports Limited
CSI Sports Trading Limited
Darlow Smithson Productions Limited
Great Percy Productions Limited
IMG Media Limited
International Management Group (UK) Limited
Manchester City Football Club Limited
PGA European Tour Productions Limited
Sports New Television Management Limited
Tiger Aspect Assets Limited
Tiger Aspect Films Limited
Tiger Aspect Holdings Limited
Tiger Aspect Pictures (Dog Eat Dog) Limited
Tiger Aspect Pictures (Royston Vasey) Limited
Tiger Aspect Pictures (Tosspot) Limited
Tiger Aspect Pictures Limited
Tiger Aspect Productions Limited
Tiger Aspect Scotland Limited
Tiger Television Limited
Tigress Productions Limited
TWI Interactive Limited
Mr Wallace is not currently beneficially interested in the issued share capital of the Company.
There is no further information required relating to Mr Wallace to be disclosed under paragraph (g) of Schedule 2 of the AIM Rules.
For further information please contact:
Rangers International Football Club plc
Brian Stockbridge
David Somers
James Easdale
Tel: 0141 580 8647
Daniel Stewart & Company plc
Tel: 020 7776 6550
Paul Shackleton / James Thomas
Newgate Threadneedle
Tel: 020 7148 6143
Graham Herring / Roddy Watt / John Coles
Media House International Ltd
Tel: 020 7710 0020
Jack Irvine
I am sorry but I disagree that the old club/new club argument is just a distraction ,IMO it’s fundamental to this whole charade .
It is of as much importance as the levels of rule bending,breaking (some say corruption ) in our game as a whole .
If as many believe ,that there was a plan hatched many years ago when the owner of the old club (pre Whyte ) must have realised that there was no way back and liquidation was the only option .
The death of the old club through mountainous debts ,sold off revenue streams and tax evasion scandals led to the end of the club who benefited on the PARK from the monies received ,if it could have secured a CVA then the SMSM and it’s fans could have shouted from the rooftops and demanded that everyone should refer and treat it as the old club.
The fact that the SFA planned to place any club who may have hatched such a plan to jettison it’s debts and responsibilities says everything about that organisation and is of as much importance but both subjects are a pivotal part of what a lot of us on here believe has gone on ,especially if it is proved the SFA were party to the scheme from the start .
The constant (boring) argument of old club / new club is not aimed at the new club fans ,IMO it is aimed at the SMSM and the PEEPIL in charge of our game ,it is our way of telling them WE know what they have been up to and will be watching what they do next .
Neepheid……
I was disappointed to read your decision to leave this blog as I always valued your input and took notice of all you posted but IMO the old club/new club argument would be unimportant if it was only between rival football supporters but on here I believe it is between all REAL SCOTTISH FOOTBALL SUPPORTERS AND THE SFA/SMSM.
Sevco appoint Graham Wallace as new CEO.
Wonder how long it will take the bampots to find out what he eats for breakfast.
TSFM says: (554)
November 19, 2013 at 10:36 pm
42 30 Rate This
… and of exponentially lesser import than seeing to it that some kind of justice and integrity is restored to the game.
————
I hear people asking, “How can some kind of justice and integrity be restored while the SFA do not come clean on this vital issue?”
It’s a conundrum. For many, without a clear statement from the SFA, it means new club starts with all the privilege and protection afforded the old. Status quo, as you were.
Like you, I don’t see the difficulty with fans retaining their history. How could anyone? Attempting to deprive people of their own personal memories would be absurd. I understand the Brand Nazism reference. Fans of any club would do the same, and should not be chided for it.
Airdrie United used to have a fine history page that clearly dated their birth date as being in this century. But it also carried the history of the previous incarnation, in a kind of merged history timeline.
Given the circumstances in 2012, RFC supporters would have had no problem with that kind of approach, I’m sure. After all, newspapers and pundits had announced it was the end of days. At that point they would have been happy with any team playing in blue called something similar. It’s only become contentious because Charles Green and his PR machine were desperate to push a lie for commercial reasons — and the bumbling SFA allowed this to happen. It might still come back to bite them in the bum.
In the long run, adopting the same club myth will be most damaging for the Ibrox faithful. A once-in-a-lifetime chance to re-define the football club in blue, it’s core values, and football ethos was lost. It’s now same old, same old — worse, perhaps, than before. And commercially, it’s oot the Murray frying pan intae the mystery international spiv fire, flushing money doon the lavvy while they go. Who’d be a supporter of TRFC?
Well it’s official 😛 well it’s in the record 😆 how will mr Lunny deal with mr Lawwell ?? Or will he just use the carpet/brush system favoured by the SFA regarding avoiding telling how it really is down ibrokes way? It’s all fine now tho everything’s in place for the AGM ( snigger) and all will be sorted then 😉 Aye right 😆 😆
New Ibrox CEO Graham Wallace has previous (or current) links with IMG. This, I assume, is the same IMG which employs Alastair Johnston. I wonder if they know each other?
Neepheid…
This whole saga has been frustrating…from the moment big Davie sold the club furra pound until today and everything in between…
This story has many strands…and the discussion revolves around the here and now on any given week…
The same club old club topic I believe is relevant…at least for me it is because of the money involved to the creditors…and if it is important for the spivs to paint that lie then it is important for me and anyone else in this tale to state otherwise…it may seem less important than other aspects…but it is important none the less…
Your conributions are and have been important…don’t let frustration stop that from continuing.
In excess off 300,000 shares dumped in T’Rangers yesterday.
Share price 1p off the historic low.
Will history be broken yet again today?
Graham Wallace, discuss?
If the old/new club discussion is too boring for anyone, just skip past any posts on the subject. It’s not too difficult really.
ringostar says: (11)
November 20, 2013 at 8:20 am
1 0 Rate This
Graham Wallace, discuss?
———–
He was on the ECA while there. Maybe still is?
Why did he leave City?
He can’t be cheap.
Oops, I’ve only got questions …
Royston Vasey, eh? Finally, Sevco gets a local guy for local peepil.
These new CEO’s?
I suppose it’s the equivilent of taking a Postie job in the run up to Christmas wi T’Rangers.
Talking about Postie, should we not be hearing today that the minutes for the 19/12/2013 T’Rangers AGM should be landing on shareholder doormats today?
SSN Saying that the appointment has the caveat that at the AGM the current board must retain their positions in order for this appointment to go through yet no mention at all in the DR.
Been lurking here since Feb last year, read every post and sometimes even I get fed up with the constant shifting mirage of lies , corruption. incredibly pathetic rage PR and a load of :slamb: bumping their rotten gums about things they know nowt about. I used to buy the papers until I peeked through the curtain on this site and things have never been the same. All thanks to people like Neepheid (it would take to long to list the valuable posters on here) who I hope will continue to shine a light on the machinations of the stupid (to put it kindly).
We must not lose heart or faith that the game is up. Or the game is up.
Nothing like a Postie job.
Wallace will have a long term copper-bottomed contract by the Craig/Charlie/Somers faction who call every real shot and who have brought him in for a few weeks.
He’ll be well briefed and will be well paid too.
Bawsman says: (230)
November 20, 2013 at 8:14 am
In excess off 300,000 shares dumped in T’Rangers yesterday.
================================================
Bawsman, I saw trades for around 220,000 shares, did I miss some?
whatsthescore says: (8)
November 19, 2013 at 11:52 pm
10 54 i
Rate This
This is where the MSN get to say UEFA have recognised Rangers as the same club. I can’t be bothered searching but I remember quotes from this organisation saying they had spoke to SFA and they had confirmed that it was the same club.
I know this will generate a lot of thumbs down but this is where they get it from. I’m just reminding you all. It’s strange you all appear to have forgot about this. I’ve noticed you lot don’t like anyone going against the acknowledged TSFM wisdom on certain matters.
http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/205975-european-clubs-body-downgrades-rangers-status-but-recognises-history/
—————————–
“Rangers FC held ordinary membership with the ECA before entering into administration and later into liquidation,” an ECA spokesperson confirmed to STV.
“Meanwhile Rangers FC, owned by the Rangers Football Club Plc, transferred all its assets, including its goodwill, to Sevco Ltd (Sevco Ltd later changing its name to the Rangers Football Club Ltd)
“Alike at Scottish FA level, this ‘new entity’ had to re-apply for membership with ECA as according to Swiss law, membership of an association is neither heritable nor transferable (article 70.3 of the Swiss Civil Code).”
What was it Phil said about own goals?
Given the number of film production companies on his CV I’d say Mr Wallace enjoys his tax planning…….
That analogy to RFC being a chicken posted earlier was awesome… except the bear got it all wrong.
The chicken is RFC, born in 1872 – the club. The eggs however are irrelevant. At some time many years later that chicken became a ltd company – say Chicken ltd. Even more years later a farmer bought the chicken (its holding company). That farmer then sold the chicken to another farmer with wealth off the radar. A few years later, the farmer ran out of money to feed the chicken on 14th feb 2012, The chicken subsequently died on the 31st Oct 2012.
The farmer then went and bought a new chicken and called it ‘The’ chicken…
Old Club / New Club debate………..
They died – if they want to be known as what they were – it’s simple – Pay The Debt.
Myself, I call them SEVCO – wouldn’t it be easier if we all did? On here, in pubs, journos and tv.
If you’re talking to someone who mentions the ‘Dead Club’ just say – ‘You mean SEVCO’
Come on folks, I can’t be the first to notice his little belter in the CEO announcement
Why even mention it?
And why specifically use the word ‘currently’
Graham Wallace
A man who has just come for a club with money being thrown at it but still posted record operating losses.
Would it not be better, like the football manager’s job, to get someone who has experience of grinding it out.
stevensanph says: (190)
November 20, 2013 at 9:15 am
Good to have you back after all the s**t you must have been through in thePhillipines.
Not The Huddle Malcontent says: (1028)
November 19, 2013 at 4:52 pm
Danish Pastry says: (1693)
November 19, 2013 at 4:16 pm
3 0 Rate This
fara1968 says: (140)
November 19, 2013 at 2:01 pm
————
Another wee detail from SSB is worth reporting:
Mark Guidi, mentioning Boyd or Rhodes, said that Boyd was the all-time top scorer in the SPL, and that (the SPL) was gone, finished, so that record will stand, it will never be bettered. Hmm …
Now taking the previous argument about the club, surely it’s the same SPL? Only the name has changed. But no, according to Guidi, the SPL is gone, finished.
——————————————-
ah, but……just to make it more confusing Danish
the SPFL is actually the SPL with a new name (same company number)
So, RFC PLC dies, is liquidated and gone. A new club forms and claims to be the old club – FINE
the SPL goes through the process of acquiring the SFL members and changes it’s name keeping the same company name, accounts, creditors, contracts etc – yet it is no more – FINE
strange world these hacks live in.
I’m starting to think I am just a Sim living in a gme like second life or such like…..i’ve somehow ended up beyond the looking glass.
_________________________
For me the same club debate is crucially important as someone eloquently and concisely posted the other day – if you give an inch they’ll take a mile. This issue is the prime source of the extreme bad feeling eating away at the Scottish game. Normally moderate RFC fans are foaming at the mouth because they perceive that their club has been “relegated” to the bottom division in an unprecedented “punishment” and “lost all their players” – although who it was that forced these players out the door as a “punishment” is not explained. Only with recognition that the new club is exactly that, can perspective be attained. Whether they hold the history dear to their hearts is another matter but the fact that they are a new entity reveals that there have been no “punishments” other than an unpaid fine because it was the old club, as if to prove our point.
Re the same club/new league beauty from Guidi above…. Another one that is trotted out by Sevconians from time to time is that the Champions League is a different tournament from the European Cup therefore Celtic are not former winners of the trophy, and anyway the European Cup was much easier to win than the Champions League.
Leaving aside the fact that it’s the same actual trophy that was presented to Bayern Munich back in May (Celtic won the first competition with the current trophy after Real Madrid were allowed to keep the old one for winning it five times in 1966) – my stock answer is “Well if it was so easy to win, why didn’t Rangers win it?”. Gets them every time.
Joburgbhoy says: (20)
November 20, 2013 at 9:27 am
Thanks… mercifully I am at the other end of the country so wasn’t affected by the storm at all. Unfortunately millions of others weren’t so fortunate. That region also had a bad earthquake last month so they are really in a bad way, not helped by a locally run relief operation which makes the SFA look competent.
Had a bet with tic6709 last week that p lawell would say sorry for his comments about sevco You win mate 5pound sent to tsfm .Oh and you can keep ibrox. 😀
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-make-official-complaint-sfa-2811248?
I wonder if we will ever see the wording of the ‘complaint’
Dear brother loony
Peter Lawwell has been casting aspersions about ‘a ”fellow club” within the professional SPFL structure.
As Mr Lawwell is a CEO of a member club, and additionally, sits on the SFA board.
This is a serious misconduct of his SFA position.
can you censor Mr Lawwell for castigating another member club.
Yours true bluey
Jack – erm, Dave, no , sorry. . . Graham (CEO)
NewGers hits a new low.
Dropped a penny on early trading, down to 40p a share. 52 week high was 94p. 57% down on high, 43% down on float price of 70p. I really hope none of my pension funds invested in this dog…
Seamus says: (5)
November 20, 2013 at 9:15 am
8 0 i
Rate This
Old Club / New Club debate………..
They died – if they want to be known as what they were – it’s simple – Pay The Debt.
Myself, I call them SEVCO – wouldn’t it be easier if we all did? On here, in pubs, journos and tv.
If you’re talking to someone who mentions the ‘Dead Club’ just say – ‘You mean SEVCO’
========================================================
Doesn’t work in the Scotsman comment’s mate
SEVCO is, according to them, “a sectarian” term…………………I kid you not.
Oh the irony. On the LSE 3 month share price chart for Rangers Internatinal Football Club Plc – the high price is 54 pence per share – with the price dropping now to the new low of 40 pence.
54 to 0 and counting?
http://www.lse.co.uk/SharePrice.asp?shareprice=RFC
jockybhoy says: (264)
November 20, 2013 at 9:50 am
2 0 Rate This
NewGers hits a new low.
Dropped a penny on early trading, down to 40p a share. 52 week high was 94p. 57% down on high, 43% down on float price of 70p. I really hope none of my pension funds invested in this dog…
========================================
The easdale’s must be kicking themselves
Instead of paying Chico verde’s top dollar for the Sevco parent company shares, they could have got them half price and maybe even cheaper ?
blu says: (444)
November 20, 2013 at 8:56 am
================================
You are correct Blu, I meant in excess of 200,000, my (honest) mistake.
Oldco newco.
CW is sevco they are sevco. Liquidation speaks for itself. We on here debate both sides of the arguement. MSM do not, they will not, that says it all. If it happened to another team would MSM debate it; IMO, no, they would say newco. That is another reason why this topic is of the highest importance.
Sfa want them as they were, sfa have to go.
It is standard procedure for all directors to seek reappointment at the first AGM. See clauses 73-80 of Table A.
http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/companiesAct/implementations/TableAPublicOct2007.pdf
Directors’ share interests are notifiable to AIM and RIFC PLC have been in hot water for some of their previous announcements, so that statement is worded as one would expect. The use of currently may mean that he is in the process of acquiring a nominal shareholding as there could be a requirement for directors to have a prescribed minimum holding (although the RIFC PLC financial statements state that Bryan Smart (a non-exec.) had a nil holding at 30 June 2013). I’m fairly certain that all the PLCs of which I am a shareholder operate that policy.
The RIFC Plc announcement re Mr Iain Graham Wallace
http://rangers.g3dhosting.com/regulatory_news_article/353
has a list of the companies at which he is / or was a director. Marlborough Sports Media Limited is the only one that is current. However, a quick check reveals that the only director listed for Marlborough Sports Media Limited is not ‘Iain Graham Wallace’ but someone with the name of ‘Graham Wallace’.
http://companycheck.co.uk/company/08602856/MARLBOROUGH-SPORTS-MEDIA-LTD/directors-shareholders
Who are these people? I demand to be told!
Tic 6709 says: (562)
November 20, 2013 at 10:30 am
4 0 Rate This
———–
And 3 x salaries?
Anyone thinking these guys are being brought in to effect the switch of assets to RIFC? Even if PM &Co are elected to the board of TRFC, won’t they be sitting with an … ahem … empty shell.
jockybhoy says: (264)
November 20, 2013 at 9:50 am
The general trend is as you say and fits with the standard maxim of never to invest in football clubs that are bust. Where are you getting your current share price info from though?
From London Stock Exchange (not LSE (London South East) site – shows only 3 trades today at 41.50 pence:
Here’s a prediction…..Laxey partners will support all of the recent appointments to the board.
The Murray’s and Jim McColl will know by now they are beaten and will be desperately trying to cobble together a face saving PR statement.
Meanwhile radio silence and confusion will be the order of the day from the “high profile” mouthpieces at follow follow, CRO and the Rangers Standard. No question their track record has been getting nothing from something.
I think Oscar Wilde said it best :
“Ambition is the last refuge of the failure.”
Does it matter who wins the AGM vote?.
Did the shareholders receive their notices this morning?.
Will there even be an AGM?.
If there is,will anyone explain how this basket case is going to trade its way out of trouble?.
jimlarkin says: (648)
November 20, 2013 at 9:44 am
17 2 i
Rate This
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-make-official-complaint-sfa-2811248?
I wonder if we will ever see the wording of the ‘complaint’
Dear brother loony
Peter Lawwell has been casting aspersions about ‘a ”fellow club” within the professional SPFL structure.
As Mr Lawwell is a CEO of a member club, and additionally, sits on the SFA board.
This is a serious misconduct of his SFA position.
can you censor Mr Lawwell for castigating another member club.
Yours true bluey
Jack – erm, Dave, no , sorry. . . Graham (CEO)
——————————————–
Have Sevco actually made a complaint though?
Keith Jackson and the DR would never lie about something like that would they? Not even in the interests of squirreling
And if they were fed a lie they would check the veracity of it scrupulously :slamb: :slamb: :slamb: :slamb: :slamb: :slamb:
The Rangers board seem to be playing a decent game here in strengthening that board with people who seem eminently suitable for the jobs they are taking on. There is obviously still the possibility that Murray(s) will get onto the board as well. However if the current board have a strong enough presence, particularly in the key areas (Chair, CEO, FD) then that might present a bit of a nuisance rather than an outright coup.
It’s actually quite a clever move, getting their own men in place before they have others thrust upon them. It should keep them in power, even if they have others (unwanted) sitting in the board room. However if this happens then it is difficult to see a settled board going forward. In fact it would make it really awkward for Murray etc sitting there giving it “credibility” with no real power to change anything.
Barcabhoy,perhaps DM had a literary bent in his desire for Rangers aggrandisement.
‘Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination.’
Oscar Wilde
Which only goes to show that some of his quotes are less appealing than others……Wilde that is.
Brenda says:
November 20, 2013 at 7:55 am
Well it’s official well it’s in the record how will mr Lunny deal with mr Lawwell ??
————————————————————————————————————-
Mr Lunny hasn’t yet got as far as dealing with the outburst from that Turnbull Hutton chappy last year, so Lawwell will be at the very bottom of his in-tray. Set your clock for the Celtic Supremo’s punishment to be announced in 2016.
sickofitall says: (202)
November 20, 2013 at 9:43 am
Had a bet with tic6709 last week that p lawell would say sorry for his comments about sevco You win mate 5pound sent to tsfm .Oh and you can keep ibrox. 😀
====================
Nice one mate, I have been trying to match your donation since I read your post.No success so far.
I sent a message to the mods/admin asking for a bit of help,no reply so far.
I know someone’s watching in because No1 Bob and myself have had posts removed this morning.
Are you sure you don’t want Ibrox ?
Enjoyed the banter.
It’s fine, we can all breathe a sigh of relief 😆 Neil Patey has announced that sevco’s new ‘signing’ will ‘bring harmony to the boardroom at ibrox’ 😉 😉 😉 thank goodness we’ve got almost a month till the AGM (if it ever goes ahead?) imagine the guff we will read in the msm from now till then 😀 no need for a panto ticket there’s one being played out every day 😀 have a nice day all, off to work now to smile sweetly at the sevconians
Looking at the recent problems with DAFC, Hearts and RFC (not to mention DFC and Gretna further back)
I have to ask what CONTROLS has the SFA put in place to contain the overspending?
Look at the French model where clubs are tightly controlled
IMO this overspending is simply cheating by an off field means
Bringing better players
taking players off opponents
taking from the public purse
stiffing businesses – small and large, local and national alike.
Have the SFA done ANYTHING in the past couple of years to tighten up on htis or are they happy for the losses to mount and clubs to shed debt this way?
So Jockybhoy, you’re ahead of the game here?
Expect a call to arms for the Sevconian followers to hold back on the spending for their weans xmas prezzies as there will be a great opperchancity in the New Year to purchase the gift of a lifetime for them ,details to be released shortly ,this is a once in a lifetime sale never been done before ,well under this club ,previous clubs might have tried this but not this one,believe me.
The thing is…SEVCO had to announce an intention to complain through their preferred media outlets…as not to would indicate acceptance of the joke/factual comment made…which would fly in the face of everything the spivs have been working at to avoid…..the truth!
Graham Wallace….apparently from Dumfries…I wonder…
Perhaps brand fascism may have been more appropriate, albeit still very strongly worded?
whatsthescore says: (9)
November 20, 2013 at 12:39 pm
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I know what you are saying but I read your original post and as it didn’t highlight the difference between UEFA and the ECA accepting Rangers as the same club I was going to reply along the same lines as the others have already (but wasn’t planning on jumping down your throat or anything!). Maybe if you had explained your point a bit more, as you subsequently did, you might not feel the need to start insulting people. HTH.
Neepheid….
I liken this story to a boxing match…
We all think the fight is conducted under the Queensberry rules…and that fair play and rules we all must abide to is the order of the day…
Just when we think we have delivered a knock out punch…we find the referee standing over the other fighter counting….8…9…10…(pause)…11…12…(get up)…13…14…(ffs get up)…15…
This is when we realise that no matter how many knock out blows we deliver…there will always be the opportunity given to them to switch fighters…hand pick the judges or simply ignore everyone and keep counting until they get back up to keep fighting…even though we all know…it’s 10 and out!
Frustration doesn’t even begin to describe the emotion this charade inflicts on the soul….
But thankfully what this site does allow for…is for those of us who need to take a walk in the park for a few days to exorcise those frustrations…the comfort to know…there are others here who will continue the good fight in our absence…so we can return recharged.
Hope to see you return.
GeronimosCadillac says: (70)
November 20, 2013 at 12:44 pm
My point stands, if posters had cared to read the post fully they would have understood. Some posters chose, for whatever reason, to read that I was supporting the argument and UEFA had recognised RFC
GeronimosCadillac says: (70)
November 20, 2013 at 12:44 pm
My point stands, if posters had cared to read the post fully they would have understood. Some posters chose, for whatever reason, to read that I was supporting the argument and UEFA had recognised RFC