Charles Green – What Will Football’s Authorities Do?

Avatar ByElijah Baley

Charles Green – What Will Football’s Authorities Do?

Charles Green has declared war on the Scottish football authorities. His statement and that of Duff and Phelps today deserve detailed analysis, which is ongoing at McConville Towers as we speak, and will be concluded as soon as Stewart Regan, Neil Doncaster and Peter Lawwell tell me what to write.

For now, I wanted to speculate if Mr Green had managed to forget the terms of the SFA Rules, under which Rangers FC was censured for his comments some time ago. Mr Green could well have forgotten, as the censure took place as long as eleven days ago.

The relevant rules are as follows:

Rule 1: All member clubs shall:
(a) observe the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship in accordance with the rules of fair play;
(b) be subject to and comply with the Articles and any statutes, regulations, directives, codes, decisions and International Match Calendar promulgated by the Board, the Professional Game Board, the Non-Professional Game Board, the Judicial Panel Protocol, a Committee or sub-committee, FIFA, UEFA or the Court of Arbitration for Sport;
(c) recognise and submit to the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport as specified in the relevant provisions of the FIFA Statutes and the UEFA Statutes;
(d) respect of the Laws of the Game;
(e) refrain from engaging in any activity, practice or conduct which would constitute an offence under sections 1, 2 or 6 of the Bribery Act 2010; and
(f) behave towards the Scottish FA and other members with the utmost good faith.

Rule 2: Each member shall procure that its officials, its Team Officials and its players act in accordance with Rule 1.

Rule 66: No recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player, referee, or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall bring the game into disrepute.

Rule 71: A recognised football body, club, official, Team Official, other member of Team Staff, player or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall, at all times, act in the best interests of Association Football and shall not act in any manner which is improper.

Now let’s see where Mr Green might, through inadvertence, have sinned against those rules, accidentally of course. The following are extracted from his statement on the official Rangers FC website.

“Our lawyers have made that point repeatedly to the SPL in correspondence and yet our requests for an explanation from the SPL have been completely ignored. The SPL’s silence on these issues is deafening. The outcome of the SPL’s process will have no legal effect.

“Although the SPL goes to great lengths to emphasise the independence of its Commission, the Commission is not independent of the SPL. It has been appointed by the SPL. It follows SPL rules and its process is managed by SPL staff. I don’t question the impartiality of the individual panel members but whatever decision they reach is a decision of the SPL.

“Did the SPL launch an investigation? Did they appoint a Commission?  Did they ask to see EBT correspondence? Did they ask any questions at all?  No. They did absolutely nothing.

“What compounds the breathtaking hypocrisy of the SPL in this whole saga, is that the SFA, the SPL and us – as the new owners – took part in numerous discussions regarding the new company’s league status during which it was made clear that a deal was there to be done where ‘the EBT issue’ would be dealt with as part of a package of sanctions which would be implemented in return for membership of the SFA and a place in either the SPL or Division One.

“We do not accept that people who are willing to come to an agreement on such matters then have a right to instigate a full blown inquisition when matters do not unfold as they thought they would.

“In our view, it beggars belief that an authority which can be heavily involved in these discussions to the point that the Chief Executive Neil Doncaster repeatedly stated he was not interested in stripping titles from Rangers can lurch from that position to setting up its own Commission under the chairmanship of Lord Nimmo Smith.

“I must make it clear that we are not questioning for a moment the integrity of Lord Nimmo Smith and his colleagues but we believe the SPL have been hypocritical in their approach to this matter.

“Why is the SPL rushing to judgement now when it has been sitting on the matter for two years? Their haste is particularly difficult to understand when the tax tribunal judgement is imminent.

“The factual issues in both cases are identical. We have to ask why is the SPL so anxious to issue a judgement in this matter before the tax tribunal’s findings are made public.

“Nothing has changed as the judgement still has not been made public. Why is the SPL rushing ahead when in April the SFA felt it unwise to do so?

“Rangers was not the only club in Scotland to use EBTs yet nothing was done and little has been heard about it. Also, Rangers stands accused of achieving sporting advantage unfairly – yet there is little debate over the fact in all the years EBTs were in existence at Ibrox, the Club often failed to win either the league title, or the main cup competitions.

“The decision we have taken has not been taken lightly. There are powerful representatives from Clubs within the SPL – not all of them by any means – who appear hell bent on inflicting as much damage on Rangers as possible.

“It is lamentable that the Board and executive of the organisation have not been able to deal with this appropriately. We do not hold every SPL club in the same regard. Several clubs were placed in an invidious position and we believe their interests were not best served by those in more powerful positions.

“Furthermore, as a Club we are not satisfied that the issue of conflict of interest relating to advisers to the SPL has been satisfactorily dealt with.

“Once again I would thank our supporters for their patience and tolerance. They have been asked to take it on the chin time and again and we stand united in saying: No more.”

——————————————————

Have a read through these edited highlights once again…

The SPL’s silence on these issues is deafening … the Commission is not independent of the SPL … They (the SPL) did absolutely nothing … the breathtaking hypocrisy of the SPL in this whole saga … a full blown inquisition … it beggars belief that an authority which can be heavily involved in these discussions to the point that the Chief Executive Neil Doncaster repeatedly stated he was not interested in stripping titles from Rangers can lurch from that position … we believe the SPL have been hypocritical … There are powerful representatives from Clubs within the SPL – not all of them by any means – who appear hell bent on inflicting as much damage on Rangers as possible … It is lamentable that the Board and executive of the organisation have not been able to deal with this appropriately. We do not hold every SPL club in the same regard. Several clubs were placed in an invidious position and we believe their interests were not best served by those in more powerful positions … Once again I would thank our supporters for their patience and tolerance. They have been asked to take it on the chin time and again and we stand united in saying: No more.

——————————————————

Mr Green has issued a lengthy statement, as can be seen from the fact that what is shown above is only an extract from it. It is on the official Rangers website, and is stated to be by “Rangers Football Club”.

If this is not a declaration of war on the SPL and by extension the footballing authorities in Scotland, I don’t know what is.

I spoke to a friend who compared some of Mr Green’s recent statements to what has become known as “dog whistle politics”. There is little of the dog-whistle about this – instead it is a clear rallying cry to the loyal support of Rangers, which will, I am sure ensure that the turnstiles keep clicking at Ibrox for some time yet.

As of a few minutes ago the respective posts regarding the statement on two of the main Rangers FC fan sites showed a total of 867 posts and over 26,000 views. Not bad for a statement issued two hours ago!

I also suspect that the reaction there will be 100% positive.

Deciding that they are refusing to play and denouncing the process before the first hearing takes place is an interesting tactic. Now, if the Commission proceeds, in the absence of both oldco Rangers and newco Rangers and delivers a damning judgement, it will be ignored, it appears, by Mr Green and his company. And, if action is taken, then they propose to invoke the aid of the courts to stop disciplinary action happening.

What strikes me is that, once again, Mr Green is playing a masterful hand. He is a king of diversion. When the transfer of the SFA membership took place Mr Green said:-

“There remains, however, an outstanding issue with the SPL regarding EBTs.  As we have proved in the last couple of months we will stand up to any challenges that face Rangers and will continue to fight for the Club’s best interests.”

What he has managed to do is to build the impression that the one penalty, above all others, which newco will not accept, being the most horrendous possible, is the stripping of titles. Not being barred for all time from, membership of the SPL; not being suspended for a longer period than the next three years; not the imposition of further financial penalties…

No, the one penalty to be fought against, above all others, is one which will cost newco not a penny, and will in fact generate more support from the fans.

As I said, it is brilliant!

He has challenged the football authorities to take action, as indeed he promised he would. So much gratitude for the three ruling bodies pledging to “facilitate” Rangers entry to SFL3!

And as far as his attack on some, but not all, SPL teams, one wonders why he felt constrained from telling us who they were. After all, Ibrox is the home of clarity, transparency and free speech!

However the extracts above indicate numerous ways in which the rules quoted at the top of this piece are broken. Will the SFA have the courage of its convictions to take action? Will the SFL take any steps itself?

Or has Mr Green stared them down, and, as long as the share flotation comes along in the near future, enraptured the fans into subscribing in their thousands?

As has been the case ever since RTC started, this piece could end with the line:- we have no idea what will happen next; we will have to wait and see!

Posted by Paul McConville

About the author

Avatar

Elijah Baley subscriber

1,814 Comments so far

Avatar

AngusPosted on1:00 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Mr Charles has gone very quiet the last few days.

Perhaps he’s been shut away with Cardigan and Bomber in a secure room somewhere?

View Comment

Long Time Lurker

Long Time LurkerPosted on1:01 pm - Sep 16, 2012


smallteaser says:
September 16, 2012 at 11:47

Regarding your question who is McCoist representing?

Perhaps the same people who are paying PR consultants to brief him no what to say?

I am not questioning the intellectual capacity of anyone, I’m not saying that AM cannot think or speak for himself – when I read a number of quotes in the MSM re the RFC(IA)/Sevco debacle, it appears to me that there is a propaganda war being waged. People are responding to spin and the message of the day.

They say follow the money – hence my thought, who is paying for the PR and why. At this stage my only thought is that this is linked to (S)DM – if the history of the club can be left in place (I don’t see how it can be) elements of [The] Rangers support may forget the sins of (S)DM and leave him in peace.

View Comment

Avatar

douglas brownPosted on1:05 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Hi Angus

I just your post regards TU and TD, you are correct absolute incoming, yet no explanation

View Comment

Avatar

Kindred SpiritPosted on1:41 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Let me get this straight

Cg comes out in radio with EBT’s are fine if administered correctly

then

AMC comes out in the newspaper and queries the lack of interest in CFC’s EBT

CG is playing the “nothing to see here ” card
AMC is playing the deflecting card

both are “rabble rousing” the bears into a frenzy

This has to be stopped in the interest of safety

View Comment

Avatar

jammy dodgerPosted on1:55 pm - Sep 16, 2012


douglas brown says:
September 16, 2012 at 13:05
0 1 Rate This
Hi Angus

I just your post regards TU and TD, you are correct absolute incoming, yet no explanation
======================
Can you repost this in English, Scots, or some known language, please?

View Comment

Avatar

MikecPosted on2:06 pm - Sep 16, 2012


All the comments about Charlie boy and Sneaky Ally concerning the EBT situation one saying they are legal and the other (demanding as usual) to know why Celtic have not been dealt with the same as Rfc(dead) is all about mobilising the troops . Charlie in the hope they will buy into the share issue and Ally to deflect his lack of managerial ability. MSM then fall into like like a group of sheep following theirs leader/s.

If they and their followers would only take time and have the b*lls to understand what has been said on this matter on this site, even a dockey or monkey or ass would understand the difference in the two cases.

Heee haw.

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on2:11 pm - Sep 16, 2012


At the risk of breaking our own rules regarding dicussion about the blog on the current thread, could I inform posters that in response to requests, I have been looking at the possibility of changing the format of the blog to a forum.

There can be little doubt that at the moment, the Rangers issue is the main show in town and consequently, the single issue format (although we do discuss other things 🙂 ) is adequate. However I am also very aware that if this is to become a truly universal resource for fans of all clubs, and to be seen as such by Rangers fans, we should have a platform which allows multiple threading.

I have some contacts who do web development and hosting, and a few weeks ago, I had a trial of this site running on a hosted site with the more feature-packed WordPress.Org, which would have given a better service with, amongst other things, moderation (the single biggest time consumer of all in administration). The upshot was that the change, which would have attracted costs, did not promise enough of a benefit, so the idea was shelved.

Also, someone has registered the dot com domain name, so that may give us a wee problem as well – unless the culprit would like to ‘fess up :-).

There are many issues involved in changing to a forum. It seems to me that vBulletin is the best available software in terms of ease of moderation (subjective I know so bear with me), but there is an attached cost for the program and for the hosting which would arise through its use.

I will ask those contacts to investigate the Vbulletin route to see if it will offer enough benefits and help to cut down on the inordinate amount of time spent moderating posts.

One possibility which I would like to throw out there in the meantime is to have all posters to the blog registered with verifiable email addresses at WordPress, so that we can build up a bank of trusted posters. I’d be interested to see a show of TUs or TDs for that one.

View Comment

Avatar

Fans Against CorruptionPosted on2:11 pm - Sep 16, 2012


A reminder from HMRCs statement on the refusal of the CVA and the preference for the liquidation of Rangers:
“A liquidation provides the best opportunity to protect taxpayers, by allowing the potential investigation and pursuit of possible claims against those responsible for the company’s financial affairs in recent years.”
HMRC believe there people to be pursued for the way payments were made from the Rangers EBT scheme. That they believe these payments constitute salary payments is obvious, that is why they believe tax is due to be payed and demanded it as such. But, if it was just merely a difference of opinion about which side of financially legal this approach sat, and there was a grey area, why not just claim the tax and have it paid – or if it can’t be, take the assets as part payment as the company gets liquidated? If it was just a technicality, why not just take what you can get, with the company liquidation being the punishment for the unfortunate transgressor who made an unfortunate error of judgement?
Or to look at it another way, why not “the potential investigation and pursuit of possible claims against those responsible for the company’s financial affairs in recent years” in the Celtic/Junihno case?
Why do HMRC want to pursue people in one case, and seemingly happy to get money back in the other?

It seems that HMRC don’t think the two cases represent a “technicality” in their differences. In one case, they see a policy being enacted, a routine approach to avoiding paying tax on regular salary payments. In short, if the FTT goes in favour of the HMRC position, they may pursue people in that case because they believe that what took place was a deliberate, routine policy of tax avoidance (i.e.tax evasion) on salary payments or emoluments.

Routine. Regular. That’s what makes it salary.Thats why the SPL should have been informed. Salary makes it income. That is why it is subject to income tax.

In the Celtic/Junihno case, HMRC do not see a policy being enacted, they do not see a routine approach to avoiding paying tax on regular salary payments. There is no pursuit of people in the Celtic/Junihno case.
And neither do the SPL see regular salary payments, regardless of the tax situation.

It was income, so it was taxable. But it was not routine, regular salary.

That’s some technicality, eh, Mr Traynor?

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on2:12 pm - Sep 16, 2012


jammy dodger says:

September 16, 2012 at 13:55(Edit)

douglas brown says:
September 16, 2012 at 13:05
0 1 Rate This
Hi Angus

I just your post regards TU and TD, you are correct absolute incoming, yet no explanation
======================
Can you repost this in English, Scots, or some known language, please?
________________________________________________________________________

I’m guessing iPhone autocorrect 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

smartie1947Posted on2:14 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Will the MSM ever accept that RFC/Sevco are now in SFL3?
A quick shufti this morning threw up the following:-
a) Sky teletext, football,Scottish football listed the following 14 subheads – Latest news, 12 individual SPL clubs and you know who.
a) Sunday Times. Sport section- SFL1 clubs merit a report of yesterday’s game averaging 60 words each. There is however a 400 word report, individual player rankings and reporter byline on Annan’s home match yesterday.
Conclusion:- In Scotland a Ranger’s top will attract more column inches than that of the Duchess of Cambridge.
I await the inevitable witty responses to my last sentence with baited breath.

View Comment

Avatar

arabest1Posted on2:26 pm - Sep 16, 2012


justshatered says:
September 15, 2012 at 18:15

Celtic and Juninho decided to terminate his contract early and, like most players in modern football, he was paid a pay off to terminate his contract.
Was this payment part of his contact?
Answer: NO. It was a termination payment and, as a termination payment, there was no need to have it in his contract to play football.
Was this one off payment paid via an EBT.
Answer: YES.
Were any of the SFA or SPL rules broken in this transaction?
Answer: NO because it was not a payment to play football rather it was a payment not to play football. In short it was a payment to bugger off.

————————————————————————————————————————-

Genuine question JH. If the above is true, is Silly Billy Dodds off the hook? Or is their a difference between being transferred and settling your contract, or having your contract ‘terminated’ and settling your contract?

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on2:30 pm - Sep 16, 2012


smartie1947 says:

September 16, 2012 at 14:14(Edit)
_________________________________________________

Since around 25-30% (conservative estimate) of the readership of things like the Daily Record, and Skytext are Rangers fans, it seems a bit churlish to be criticising them for that.

The problem is not that they are catering to a genuine demand, it is that they are passing up an opportunity to inform them properly by reporting only the things those people want to hear.

The issue for the MSM is fast becoming how will they justify that to the other 70% who are genuinely shocked at how they have chosen to cover this story. The answer to this may be that the conservative estimate above is FAR too conservative.

View Comment

Avatar

MikecPosted on2:31 pm - Sep 16, 2012


I think it is about time that we stop mentioning Jabba, Jacko ,et al on this site since they are obviously following some sort of hidden agenda. I find it difficult to believe they cannot understand the EBT situation, this is deliberate propaganda to support what they believe is the Establishment Club. What I find difficult to understand is why their employers , whether it be a national newspaper or radio or TV, allow them to continue in this manner.

The sad thing is that , from a R*ngers fan point of view, in following their agenda they have infact been complicit in the downfall of the Establishment Club ….. There is the irony !!!

We will find in the weeks/months that their position will become transparent and what then will their readers and the R*ngers followers react ?

View Comment

Avatar

Tina TurnerPosted on2:34 pm - Sep 16, 2012


smallteaser says:
September 15, 2012 at 13:35

Palacio67 says:
September 15, 2012 at 10:12

Tina Turner says:
September 15, 2012 at 00:04

Great Post, I would urge all to go back and have a read.
================================================
Seconded, great post

——————————————————————————–

Thanks guys – very much appreciated

View Comment

Avatar

Tina TurnerPosted on2:36 pm - Sep 16, 2012


The Iceman says:
September 16, 2012 at 00:08

Majestic analysis – a couple of genuine LOLs, thanks

Unfortunately no matter how clearly the lies are exposed, they still seem to succeed in whatever they plan

—————————————————————

Castofthousands says:
September 15, 2012 at 23:11

COT – you may be confusing the share with the membership – I believe the share is purely an SPL concept and Sevco didn’t get there. This is SFA membership we’re talking about.

Charlie Brown’s response concisely clarifies this and I respond to his point below

View Comment

Avatar

Tina TurnerPosted on2:39 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Charlie Brown says:
September 15, 2012 at 01:58

—————————————————

I totally get what you’re saying. What you’ve described is definitely the rationale the governing bodies are using to establish a “link”. But it makes no sense surely? An unconnected new club has a dead club’s membership? It only makes sense with an official acknowledgement that there is a connection. The connection has to be part of that old club – which existed separately from the “owner and operator” and never died. And only that mystery entity can receive Rangers old membership and allow the new club to still be “Rangers”

You and I may call it a zombie – but they see it as genuinely alive, even though, as Iceman says: “To date no-one can pin down what that entity actually is… some other entity without legal documentation or any means of identity won their titles and was in fact being run by Rangers Football Club”.

Without official acknowledgement, the whole idea is a nonsense.

Unfortunately, the required official acknowledgement of this mystery entity was supplied by the SPL Commission last Wednesday – before it has even sat properly in session. From what I can see, the concept of that mystery entity now exists officially. Victory Sevco.

The governing bodies seem to be using revisionism of policy and procedure (supported by a PR campaign of corrupted disinformation and public perception in the media for Sevconians) to create as many spurious links to Rangers 1873 as possible – including the bogus punishments. Any one of these “links”, under closer inspection, can be completely discredited. But they create as many as they can, hoping it becomes too onerous to deal with them all. They’re resorting to a quantity of arguments in the absence of quality.

All added together, the Sevco enablers believe, these spurious links equal a continuous existence – and an unbroken history for Sevco to inherit. The scary part is that it’s precisely these enablers – in this case the SFA – who get to decide unilaterally whether Sevco can list the Rangers 1873 trophies against Sevco “achievements”.

We all know what their decision will be.

Without any kind of vote taken by Scottish football to decide that question – and I can’t see how there ever could be such a vote in any constitutionally acceptable sense – the only real judgement on this would have to come from a related legal ruling. But, as several others have pointed out, there’s no guarantee of any such related action ever taking place – it’s in the lap of the gods.

A recent comment on here exquisitely drew our attention to the fact that, several months ago, Stewart Regan when asked directly whether Sevco and 1873 are the same club, pointedly failed to give any kind of answer. The contributor suggested Regan’s reticence was rooted in a fear of any possible future legal challenge.

Beyond any kind of related legal ruling to shed light on Sevco’s legal status (in relation to 1873) UEFA are the only objective arbiters. Perhaps that’s why we saw that hilarious comedy routine in the Sun the other day about Sevco winning the Scottish Cup and playing in Europe. No mention of Sevco being a brand new club and therefore unable to submit the required three years of accounts to UEFA of course.

But the Sun know that claim will never be questioned by fellow Sevco enablers. And any bampots who do question it will be dismissed by the MSM or terrorised by the Sevco Stasi.

And of course the point will never be tested in the real world because even my chances of winning the Scottish Cup are better than Mr McCoist’s.

But it’s another one of these little vignettes to throw on the pile of absurd claims when you’re reduced to relying on quantity of arguments over quality.

You might ask why I’m so focused on the question of the history. For me it’s all caught up in this definition of the mystery entity, the “noncorporeal” Rangers as Iceman calls it. Nobody can say what it is – but in the minds of The People, Sevco and its enablers, this mystery entity pretty much IS the history. In fact the history is the only thing The People actually care about – their precious history that means Rangers lives on no matter what.

I believe they will be found to have gained unfair advantage through cheating – so those particular trophies should be stripped as a matter of course. But even the trophies they won fairly are relevant to the wider issues around what ultimately happened to Rangers.

They won their fair trophies because they could afford to buy better players. Fair enough. But that money came from the commercial trading activities of THE CLUB – not some separate entity. The CLUB sold tickets so fans could watch the CLUB play matches, the CLUB sold merchandise, the CLUB sold ITS players. It used all the money it generated to buy new players – the MANAGER of the CLUB bought new players – and the players won trophies for the CLUB. All fair and above board, but all of this activity was carried out by the CLUB acting as one single entity.

David Murray, obsessed with some supremacist quest to bring back the Holy Grail of the Champions Cup to The People, gambled the CLUB’s entire wealth. When that was gone he gambled the CLUB’s credit-worthiness and its prestige to bring in more money. Then he used the CLUB’s reputation to bring in investors. Then he used the CLUB’s resources to set up the tax schemes that we all know so much about. And then he used the CLUB’s contacts, cheerleaders and allies to cover it up.

Put simply, Rangers itself willingly gambled its own history and prestige in order to win the ultimate European prize. And its fans – The People – bought into that supremacist dream by coming back to Ibrox in their tens of thousands following the dearth of the John Greig years.

Let’s never forget – or let them forget – that one fundamental point: they chose to gamble their CLUB, which includes its history. And they lost.

That’s why Rangers 1873, even though it will soon be in liquidation, must still be expelled from football. The history books must show it was expelled for cheating and its history died with it. And what of Sevco? Personally I would like to see no punishment at all – denying them yet another of their spurious “links”. And then Sevco can go float itself – unencumbered by any baggage of the Rangers history.

I know it was suggested in the past that UEFA were not as interested in this issue as we’d like to think they are. And then the UEFA trail went cold. But if UEFA really is our only hope on this then I think we need to see it goes to them. I suspect there are people inside and outside of the game who are keeping them appraised. But I think we as ordinary fans need to start lobbying UEFA directly again – this time telling them which legal verdicts they must watch out for.

You know, there are times when I think that the moment we view as one of our greatest victories – the SFL clubs voting to put Sevco in the 4th tier – was actually our heaviest defeat. I don’t believe for a second they ever needed to get into the SPL or even Division 1. The only thing they needed was to get voted into the league so that the SFA could transfer that damn membership. Everything else was a pantomime to distract us so we’d all go off and gorge ourselves on jelly and ice cream.

Many people, with the best of intentions, lobbied for their SFL clubs to vote for admission to the 4th tier rather than Division 1. That was a mistake. It was Sevco’s greatest victory and now they appear unstoppable. So the next couple of months are critical.

Which brings me back to the other point I made in my original post….

View Comment

Avatar

Neil TPosted on2:48 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Another example of Sevco arrogance?
This appeared on Rangers News today entitled “why we cannot win away”
The author then goes on to say they have SPL calibre players who are used to playing in front of big crowds 40,000+ in modern stadiums but to then go to “dingy wee stadiums with sometimes even no seats” and small capacities must be hard for the players to get motivated.
This analogy cracked me up… “imagine you are a solicitor in a top law firm, then for one year you are farmed out to a smaller law firm, in less than salubrious surroundings, you too would lose all motivation”
So there you have it is the wee diddy clubs causing the “big TRFC club’s players all the problems”

View Comment

Avatar

Palacio67Posted on3:42 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Tina Turner says:
September 16, 2012 at 14:39

Another great post TT,
Totally agree with trying to get a response from UEFA or even FIFA over situation. Could we in TSFM put together a letter that we can post and Email to them, surely someone is bound to get a response.
It will have to be on a day that David Taylor is not manning the It system whilst sitting below the letterbox though……

View Comment

Avatar

Doon the slopePosted on3:46 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Dont know about Fifa, but Scottish employees of Uefa tend to be Rangers minded. Dont expect any help there.

View Comment

Avatar

ikiPosted on3:53 pm - Sep 16, 2012


smartie1947 says:
September 16, 2012 at 14:14
Conclusion:- In Scotland a Ranger’s top will attract more column inches than that of the Duchess of Cambridge.
I await the inevitable witty responses to my last sentence with baited breath.
========
Although they may only be A Cups, Kate does have two whilst Sevco have none.

Your breath can be unabated.

View Comment

Avatar

AngusPosted on3:55 pm - Sep 16, 2012


jammy dodger says:
September 16, 2012 at 13:55

douglas brown says:
September 16, 2012 at 13:05

I just your post regards TU and TD, you are correct absolute incoming, yet no explanation
======================
Can you repost this in English, Scots, or some known language, please?
——–

Nem tudja hogy miért mindenki ad neki TD és nem magyarázza meg.

Hope that helps. 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

briggsbhoyPosted on3:56 pm - Sep 16, 2012


I may be visually impaired but over past couple of weeks and again in this mornings papers I cannot spot any of these tinpot dictator stars that used to adorn an old Rangers(IA) Strip on the Newco strip. Am I missing them or are they just not there? if it’s the latter does this not tell us something about what Mr Green the shepherd knows to be the truth versus what he spouts for his flock. Do you think UEFA would have something to say should they return from the Wilderness in their new form with tinpot stars on their tops in UEFA competition? The truth behind all the bluster is I hope (if my eyes do not decieve) there on the strips currently being worn.

View Comment

Avatar

ikiPosted on3:58 pm - Sep 16, 2012


correction
delete unabated … insert unbaited.

Predictive text can be nuance.

View Comment

Avatar

arabest1Posted on4:02 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Can’t believe I had my which h*nt joke removed! Mods are getting a little trigger happy!

View Comment

Avatar

CortesPosted on4:09 pm - Sep 16, 2012


I thought Magyar was shvnned on here.

View Comment

Avatar

SeamusPosted on4:15 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Braehead Waterstones……..
4 Copies of Downfall on counter – none on display.
When I bought my copy the sales assistant replaced it with another.
Sad day in Scotland when a best seller is reduced to this due to
intimidation by thugs following a defunct football team.

View Comment

Avatar

Palacio67Posted on4:18 pm - Sep 16, 2012


briggsbhoy says:

Apparently ( Or not…) I think the stars are on the side of the jersey, under the arm? Me myself have never seen them as when I see a sevconian in one of the new tops, I find I have the tendency to fall about laughing ( A bit like Eddie Murphy in BHC when he sees the Michael Jackson Fan ).

Doon the slope

Exactly, you have to think what exactly David Taylor’s part is in all of this. ( Can always remember him in the background photo in 1989 when MJ signed at Ibrox with McMurdo, Souness, Minty etc )
I think letters sent to FIFA would be more apt, I do not think they have Oldclub, Newclub guardians there.

View Comment

Avatar

CastofThousandsPosted on4:19 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Jammy Dodger 16 September 09:30

Thanks Jammy. I get it. Registration of the EBT’s with the SFA would have opened up the possibility of future criminal proceedings since HMRC would have proof that it was a club policy to evade taxation.

View Comment

Avatar

briggsbhoyPosted on4:21 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Seamus
16.15

Correction Followed not follows

View Comment

Avatar

BrendanomallyPosted on4:25 pm - Sep 16, 2012


So Ally McCoist is “baffled” by the decision that Celtic have no case to answer with regards to them using an EBT, so for the benefit of Ally and anyone else who is “baffled” by this decision, here is my take on it,

In the summer of 2004 Celtic agreed a CONTRACT with Juninho (Note that word CONTRACT as it’s crucial to this whole saga) worth £40K per Wk. Over a 3 yr period.

You got that?

Celtic agreed to pay Juninho £40K per Wk. to play football for them for 3 yrs. Juninho agreed to play football for Celtic for a 3yr period recieving payment of £40K per Wk.

The CONTRACT was duely signed and the footballing authorities were informed of the CONTRACT and the details therein.

However, around 8/9 months in Martin O’Neil decided the player was
no longer to feature in his team. Juninho was informed of this and rather than play 2nd string football agreed to the TERMINATION of his CONTRACT. (CONTRACT, there’s that word again, you’ll also notice the use of the word TERMINATION in that sentence) “…TERMINATION of his CONTRACT.” It was at this point Juninho ceased to be a Celtic player. Celtic were no longer obligated to pay him £40K perWk. The CONTRACT was TERMINATED.
You still with me?
As Celtic initiated the TERMINATION of the CONTRACT, they agreed to pay Juninho £750K, Juninho requested the money be deposited into his EBT account, an account he had set-up prior to his arrival at Celtic.
So the £750K was, as requested deposited in Juninho’s EBT account as a one-off discretionary payment. It DID NOT form part of a CONTRACT!

And that my friend is the difference between Celtic’s “use” of an EBT and Rangers’ abuse of them.
Rangers are under investigation for the use of EBT’s as part of CONTRACTUAL agreements for a decade or so prior to their demise.

View Comment

Avatar

AngusPosted on4:35 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Cortes says:
September 16, 2012 at 16:09

I thought Magyar was shvnned on here.
—-
🙂

Magyar is the nationality, magyarul the language.

Sorry, OT.

P.S> Why do Partick Thistle get called the Maryhill Magyars? Just for alliterative efect?

View Comment

Avatar

douglas brownPosted on4:40 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Brendanomally says:
September 16, 2012 at 16:25

Yes totally agree, however we were very quick to slag of Billy Dodds under the same circumstances.

View Comment

Avatar

andyPosted on4:45 pm - Sep 16, 2012


douglas brown says:
September 16, 2012 at 16:40
0 0 Rate This
Brendanomally says:
September 16, 2012 at 16:25

Yes totally agree, however we were very quick to slag of Billy Dodds under the same circumstances.
__________
Billy Dodds stated that the tax was paid on his pay off using the EBT what would be the point of it if the tax was paid

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on4:46 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Douglas Brown

Differnec ebetween Billy Dodds and HJuninho is that Billy Dodds is a paid employee of BBC and lied on air that eh had never been paid with an EBT. Then when he was caught came out with an excuse that the tax was paid – we have no idea if it was deducted form him nor if it was paid by RFC-NIL – I expect not since Hector is ok with Juninho and nto with Billy Dodds

Majore differences

No apology is needed to the liar called Billy Dodds

View Comment

Avatar

andyPosted on4:47 pm - Sep 16, 2012


The full story is that David Murray came to me and asked if I would receive a payment that was due to me, after tax, through the EBT trust. And I said that I would. It was money that was owing to me when I had six months left on my contract and I moved to Dundee United. After the tax was deducted, that money was put in the trust fund.
___________
SO Dodds is saying Rangers deducted the tax off it then paid him
through the EBT

View Comment

Avatar

douglas brownPosted on4:52 pm - Sep 16, 2012


The Invisible Line says:
September 16, 2012 at 16:46

Did he lie on air though? did he not state he was paid as normal he did not have an EBT for his salary/wages, and he did not have a second contract.

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on4:52 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Andy

A month before he claimed never to have heard about EBTs………

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on4:54 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Douglas Brown

Yes he lied on air – he said he had never heard about EBTs – don’t do a Bill Clinton and parse words – he lied – end of story

View Comment

Avatar

douglas brownPosted on4:58 pm - Sep 16, 2012


The Invisible Line says:
September 16, 2012 at 16:5

Ok, so look at andys post

How on earth did Billy Dodds benefit from that?

But lets drop this as it will be considered trolling.

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on5:03 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Douglas – it benefited Rangers IF Billy Dodd’s version is correct – he claims the tax was paid – but why would RFC-NIL pay tax on an EBT payment? Makes no sense. Neither does his explanation.

And makes no sense why you need to apologise on behlaf of us to say Billy Dodds is the same innocent victim as Juninho.,

Only thing we agree on is the trolling statement

View Comment

Avatar

andyPosted on5:04 pm - Sep 16, 2012


http://soundcloud.com/celticresearch/ebt-dodds/s-ItEEn

Dodds on 2nd March

View Comment

Avatar

andyPosted on5:06 pm - Sep 16, 2012


douglas brown says:
September 16, 2012 at 16:58
0 1 Rate Down
The Invisible Line says:
September 16, 2012 at 16:5

Ok, so look at andys post

How on earth did Billy Dodds benefit from that?

__________
Rangers were the ones benefiting from all the EBTs by paying 10m in wages instead of 20m when they were struggling to afford the 10m

View Comment

Avatar

ReadceltPosted on5:11 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Re the jags ‘marryhill Magyars’. Assume it’s the same as cowdenbeith being the ‘blue brazil’. Maybe your football history doesn’t include Puskas or Hungary once having one of the best teams in the world.
Ironic would be the word I’d use.

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on5:13 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Arabest says:

September 16, 2012 at 14:26(Edit)

justshatered says:
September 15, 2012 at 18:15

Celtic and Juninho decided to terminate his contract early and, like most players in modern football, he was paid a pay off to terminate his contract.
Was this payment part of his contact?
Answer: NO. It was a termination payment and, as a termination payment, there was no need to have it in his contract to play football.
Was this one off payment paid via an EBT.
Answer: YES.
Were any of the SFA or SPL rules broken in this transaction?
Answer: NO because it was not a payment to play football rather it was a payment not to play football. In short it was a payment to bugger off.

————————————————————————————————————————-

Genuine question JH. If the above is true, is Silly Billy Dodds off the hook? Or is their a difference between being transferred and settling your contract, or having your contract ‘terminated’ and settling your contract?

________________________________________________________________________

The Dodds issue wasn’t about the EBT in itself. It was about his misleading his radio audience. Notwithstanding my own personal abhorrence of tax avoidance in itself, there was never any additional technical or moral question raised – other than that he lied to a BBC audience, and was protected from the consequences of that deception by sports editor Richard Gordon.

I don’t think Dodds is a bad guy because of this. If we believe the story he eventually told about the EBT, I believe he was duped by DM. He was going along with DM’s request to be paid via EBT. I think when he was asked about it initially he lied because he panicked, and knowing that his own personal EBT situation was different from others, didn’t want to be lumped in with the rest. As it turns out though, it was the wrong call given Mark Daly’s programme was a matter of weeks after his initial denial.

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on5:19 pm - Sep 16, 2012


TSF – correct

Our good Buddie CE posted over on RTC his complaint reply from BBC regarding the complait he made where it was excused on that he did not really understand the question when he said he had never heard of EBT no used one and got paid the same as everyone else.

If the everyone else meant the Ibrox dressing room………….then…………

Maybe CE can repost the BBS reply to put Douglas at rest and we can move on from sad liars to influential;liars…….and expose the player registration nonsense!

View Comment

Avatar

ReadceltPosted on5:22 pm - Sep 16, 2012


On the subject of people’s experience of downfall being kept on or behind the counter in bookshops.
Would I be right in assuming its to avoid stock damage?

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on5:27 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Angus says:

September 16, 2012 at 16:35(Edit)

Magyar is the nationality, magyarul the language.

Sorry, OT.

P.S> Why do Partick Thistle get called the Maryhill Magyars? Just for alliterative efect?
__________________________________________________________________________

The Maryhill Magyars was attributed to PT by the late and inimitable witer and sports journalist Malcolm Munro. Malky, a wonderful writer and devotee of Damon Runyon was a Jags fan. He ascribed the nickname ironically after the brilliant Hungarian side of 1954 that was cheated (also Malky’s words) out of the world cup.

View Comment

Avatar

ulyanovaPosted on5:27 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Copying this from Ragersmeeja. I don’t know where the original poster (goes by the name of rangerclackman) got it from as he does not cite his source.

———————————————————————–

ABERDEEN: Neil McDougal, Northern Lights Aberdeen Supporters Club, said: “If Rangers were found guilty, Dons fans I speak to can’t really see the point of stripping titles and trophies.

“It would be a case of changing the ribbons from blue to green. It is time for Scottish football to move on.”

Dundee United: Arab Trust board member Mike Barile said: “Without a doubt they should be stripped of seven titles if they are found guilty. There is no place for cheating in football.”

HIBS: Mike Riley, chairman of Hibs Supporters’ Association said: “The general feeling would be to take the titles off them. If they won them under false pretences then they should not have them, it’s as simple as that.”

Hearts (SFL3 feeder club): Steve Kilgour, federation of Hearts (SFL3 feeder club) supporters clubs’ secretary, said: “I’m loathe to kick a club when it’s down.

“But if they fielded players they couldn’t have otherwise afforded it’s a form of cheating.

“Potential loss of titles is a grey area but more appropriate than monetary fines.”

INVERNESS: Caley Thistle fans’ chief David Sutherland said: “We’ve seen a precedent in other sports, look at the story of Lance Armstrong.

“If it is found old Rangers acted illegally and had an unfair financial advantage then the next logical step would be to take away the titles.”

KILMARNOCK: Sandy Armour, Kilmarnock Supporters Trust, said: “To attempt to take titles away from Rangers, if wrongdoing was proved, would be a legal minefield.

“I don’t see how such a move could be enforced.”

MOTHERWELL: John Wilson, Motherwell Supporters Trust, said: “Guilt can only mean Rangers being stripped of their titles.

“Dunfermline were booted out of the Scottish Cup a few seasons ago for a relatively minor registration mix-up.”

ROSS COUNTY: Alan Ross, who runs County supporters’ JailEnder website, said: “Rather than take away any titles, football authorities should put measures in place so a situation like this can never happen again.”

ST JOHNSTONE: Gordon Muir, St Johnstone Fans Working Group, said: “Rangers should forfeit any titles if found to have been won while breaking the rules.

“But I don’t believe those titles should be passed on.”

————————————————————————————————-

Are these genuine quotes?

View Comment

Avatar

campsiejoePosted on5:28 pm - Sep 16, 2012


The difference between Dodds and Juninho
Celtic accepted PAYE & NI was due and paid the required amount, whilst it is a matter of debate as to whether RFC (IA) did the same for Mr Dodds
The MSM do not seem to think it strange, that Mr Dodds would have to request a discretionary loan from a trust, for money legitimately due to him, on which PAYE & NI has supposedly been paid
Excuse me, whilst I re-zip the back of my head

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on5:39 pm - Sep 16, 2012


dzugashvilli says:

Are these genuine quotes?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Apparently

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/fans-have-their-say-on-how-rangers-should-1325012

View Comment

Avatar

martin o’neillPosted on5:48 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Posters please note, 2 ‘Ls’ in O’Neill. The oldest traceable clan name in Europe dosen’t deserve the spelling used for 1200 years to be changed by ignorance, laziness or lack of attention to detail. Anyone in the clan who spell it differently have been condemned to do so, in the main, by bureaucratic error

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on5:52 pm - Sep 16, 2012


douglas brown says:

September 16, 2012 at 17:48

The Invisible Line says:
September 16, 2012 at 16:54

The difference between Dodds and Juninho

Whilst your zipping up the back of your head please consider this:

Why do you not swap Dodds for Juninho in your post then you might understand.
*******

I’ll take tha apology now since it was campsiejoe who said the part about zipping up his head – if you wish to pick fights to deflect the blog, at least do it correctly and accurately 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

ulyanovaPosted on5:53 pm - Sep 16, 2012


scottc says:
September 16, 2012 at 17:39
0 0 Rate This
dzugashvilli says:

Are these genuine quotes?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Apparently
———————————

Thanks, I should have guessed the source.

Take it an EGM has been called in Aberdeen!

View Comment

Avatar

briggsbhoyPosted on5:54 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Creepylurker says:

September 15, 2012 at 23:51

We’re on the same page now, I didn’t pick up on your sarcasim. if I could dae a wee smiley I’d add one.

View Comment

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on6:02 pm - Sep 16, 2012


TSFM says:
September 16, 2012 at 14:11
 89 2 Rate This
At the risk of breaking our own rules regarding dicussion about the blog on the current thread, could I inform posters that in response to requests, I have been looking at the possibility of changing the format of the blog to a forum …
———–

Moderation could, potentially, become an even bigger task on a forum, especially if the system of registration is automated – allowing virtually anyone to register, add a bit of graffitti, then swan off. In an ideal world this would be a phpbb-type forum but there is so much vandalism on forums that I really do wonder if it’s a step worth taking, at present.

The solution is probably the ‘trusted member approach’. To be honest, it would be no loss if some of us posted less. I try to curb my own desire to post by asking myself if it is at all relevant or just more unnecessary padding and clutter. Most of it is padding, so I post very little 🙂 The Groucho Marx adage: “I don’t care to belong to a club that accepts people like me as members” chimes true for some of us. I’m quite happy to read the informed posts along with the great number of anonymous readers. So my concern about a forum is that it could become unfocused and overrun with spurious posters.

PS Why dot com? Dot net, dot info, dot org are all good, as are many others. Com is commercial, hardly relevant anyway 😉

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on6:03 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Green & McCoist rabble-rousing. – with unintended consequences.
========================================================

Both these individuals seem to be free to cast aspersions and disseminate disinformation to create a useful ‘siege mentality’ at Sevco – and to ultimately protect their club/business.

Both seem free to do this via the compliance of an unquestioning MSM – and the lack of control, (or counter-statements), coming from the SFA.

So what happens – God forbid – if Sevco meet Celtic in a cup game?

If there is any trouble will both these individuals trot out the familiar line that they can’t be held to account for any idiots who ‘misinterpret’ their accusations/veiled threats/etc. ?

This could be another consequence of Regan’s continued failure to display leadership.

View Comment

Avatar

arabest1Posted on6:21 pm - Sep 16, 2012


martin o’neill says:
September 16, 2012 at 17:48
0 0 Rate This
Posters please note, 2 ‘Ls’ in O’Neill. The oldest traceable clan name in Europe dosen’t deserve the spelling used for 1200 years to be changed by ignorance, laziness or lack of attention to detail. Anyone in the clan who spell it differently have been condemned to do so, in the main, by bureaucratic error

Shirley the most pedantic post ever on TSFM! 😉 But I will try to match it! 😉

Mass education did not occur until late 19th century, consequently spelling mattered little for most of the 1200 years you quote. Most variants of name spelling occurred in the registering for work of illiterate migrants in the industrial age, who only had a phonetic version of their surname. Scrolls and parish records always display a variety of spellings of all written languages including names. (I have O’Neil’s in my family)

View Comment

Avatar

douglas brownPosted on6:22 pm - Sep 16, 2012


As I said earlier, we need to look past the end of our noses here. Rangers may be the biggest story, but it won’t always be. We are convinced that if we are to succeed, we need to have Rangers fans on board. The fact that they are largely absent (with a few notable exceptions) here has made it easy for us to indulge in pejorative language when referring to individuals associated with RFC and TRFC. By and large, that kind of language is not used to describe people associated with other clubs.

LoL you dont make it easy to survive on this board. What I would suggest is you drop the anti rangers and concentrate on what you claim to be an all inclusive forum,
There have been many good posters on this forum driven away by its anti rangers agenda or the unbelievable sanctimonious nonsense regarding fair play and social responsibility. For example we had last week many posts regarding Scotland as a team and how we need to change the coaching of young players being slagged of by others wishing only to pursue a anti-rangers focus. For gods sake they are in the 3rd division learn to live with it. As for Rangers “phoenixing” what business would not? We have to accept that given their large customer base, brand and the green light by HMRC they were always going to claim continuity, and they have.
One question: What I find strange is the rangers fans hate the SFA/SPL the MSM as equally as you guys do, albeit from a diametrically opposite viewpoint. So why so few bears on this site?

View Comment

Avatar

smartie1947Posted on6:31 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Dear Mr TSFM,
I appreciate foul and abusive language and any mention of any religion are banned on this site and rightly so.
Could I be so bold as to ask you to consider another word that might be added to any blacklist.
It crops up depressingly frequently, has had it’s relevance explained ad nauseum and seems to be a trigger point for Trolls-R-Us on an almost daily basis.
I give you J*n*n*o.
Neat little footballer in his day, but God I am sick to the back teeth of hearing that word repeated here.

View Comment

Avatar

stmileyPosted on6:34 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Greens Rangers are in the business of football, a results driven business. It can be a cruel master, with dips in form and plain bad luck(injuries, suspensions, refereeing decisions) heaping huge pressure upon management.

The coming ten days sees Greens Rangers take on an in form QOS side, who have scored 12 goals in their last 3 matches, which included a 2-0 win against Hibs. They will prove to be Ally’s stiffest test so far this season. Defeat will add further pressure ahead of another 3rd division away day, this time Montrose play host to the great adventurers, their lowly position should not blind opponents. Their every bit as capable of getting a result as Berwick and Annan were. This comes a few short days before Scotlands biggest domestic fixture of the season so far, when the ‘welcome’ a high-flying Motherwell side fresh from their Champions League exploits. Their fans will be expecting to win.

Negative results in all 3 matches is almost unthinkable for Greens Rangers, but all too predictable going on current form. So I ask the question.

Who will be under more pressure, if results go wrong, the ever faltering manager Mr Alistair McCoist or the financial leader of the ship Mr Charles Green?

If the results are consistently negative, could Green afford to allow the failings to go unchecked?

View Comment

Avatar

wolfmanPosted on6:36 pm - Sep 16, 2012


smartie1947 says:
September 16, 2012 at 18:31
1 0 Rate This
Dear Mr TSFM,
I appreciate foul and abusive language and any mention of any religion are banned on this site and rightly so.
Could I be so bold as to ask you to consider another word that might be added to any blacklist.
__________________________________________________________________________

I appreciate foul and abusive language also!

View Comment

Avatar

douglas brownPosted on6:40 pm - Sep 16, 2012


stmiley says:
September 16, 2012 at 18:34

Unfortunately QOS are playing them at Ibrox, I would certainly agree that away from home Rangers will struggle but at Ibrox, i dont think so.

View Comment

Para Handy

Para HandyPosted on6:41 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Angus says:
September 16, 2012 at 16:35
 3 1 Rate This
Cortes says:
September 16, 2012 at 16:09

P.S> Why do Partick Thistle get called the Maryhill Magyars? Just for alliterative efect?
——————————-
After winning the League Cup in 1971, Thistle were entered into the Cup Winnners Cup and drawn against Honved (I was at the home game which we lost 0-3 after losing 1-0 away).

Pretty sure that this Is the origin of the term not the 1950s story…

View Comment

Avatar

douglas brownPosted on6:42 pm - Sep 16, 2012


TSFM says:
September 23, 2012 at 00:00

So we have to see this as the latest post till Sept 23rd this makes it even harder to navigate.

View Comment

Avatar

AgrajagPosted on6:45 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Can we just clear something up, well as far as I understand it.

Money coming out of an EBT sub trust does not have to be a loan, it can come out as a payment. The beneficiary simply has to pay the tax which falls due when he takes it.

So Mr Dodds, or any of the rest, did not need to take loans. They could have had their money, so long as they were willing to pay the tax like the rest of us.

The “loans” thing is a bit of a cop out for them. Or at last implying it is the only way to get their money. They do it that way because it doubles the amount they receive.

Someone can correct me if I have misunderstood that bit.

View Comment

Avatar

douglas brownPosted on6:56 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Agrajag says:
September 16, 2012 at 18:45

My understanding is that termination of contracts (Dodds Juninho) then they are paid via the trust the amount due to them after tax, so the player does not actually gain the club do. The players even on contractual payments vis EBT’s do not gain, they demand x amount a week to play football, the club gains by tax avoidance. The player simply gets what is agreed.

View Comment

Senior

SeniorPosted on7:06 pm - Sep 16, 2012


ina Turner says:
September 16, 2012 at 14:39

Another great post TT,
Totally agree with trying to get a response from UEFA or even FIFA over situation. Could we in TSFM put together a letter that we can post and Email to them, surely someone is bound to get a response.
It will have to be on a day that David Taylor is not manning the It system whilst sitting below the letterbox though……

———————————————–
Great idea!
Lets not talk about it lets do it.
I am sure there are people on here who can compose a letter in concise and factual order outlining the enormity of this scandal and how the governing bodies have singularly failed in their primary duties, that of safeguarding the game in Scotland, and how it has affected every club in Scotland and some others across Europe.
We need a standard letter that is cogently framed so that nobody is left in any doubt that this will be pursued to it’s proper conclusion.

BTW I think it was RAB a while back who was to compose a list of relevant email addresses, media, football, and political etc. addresses – was it ever completed?

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on7:08 pm - Sep 16, 2012


douglas brown says:
September 16, 2012 at 18:40
0 0 Rate This
stmiley says:
September 16, 2012 at 18:34

Unfortunately QOS are playing them at Ibrox, I would certainly agree that away from home Rangers will struggle but at Ibrox, i dont think so.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Montrose are also playing their game at Ibrox

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on7:08 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Oh dear – the players do not gain – this is the message from Jack today is it?]

Of course they all gained.

Why did Stefan Klos came to Scotland? The money – and how could he get more money – because they could pay him much more than anyone else in Scotland and Germany and many clubs in England because to meet his demands for x they could get y without having to factor in NIC/taxes that other clubs had to subtract.

The club gained by not paying taxes
The players gained by increased salaries
The fans gained by watching player their club could not afford legitimately

Anything else is dressing a chicken up to look like a turkey

View Comment

Avatar

OldcobrokemyheartbycheatingPosted on7:09 pm - Sep 16, 2012


The ending of this blog will be the moderation I feel how much users will be lost through this? Trolling is indeed a pain but im sure as grown men/woman we can read through the drivel. how seriously we treat ourselves is dangerous look at minty moonbeams as an example. I hope my fears are unfounded though as we have to keep an eye, on our game and not let the bigwigs ruin it.

View Comment

Avatar

douglas brownPosted on7:20 pm - Sep 16, 2012


The Invisible Line says:
September 16, 2012 at 19:08

Nonsense. If you are an employee you want to know what take home pay you will receive. So they negotiate or rather their agents do the amount they will actually receive. So player x says he wants 30k a week in his bank plus accommodation plus a car etc. That is agreed. The EBT is then set up to save the Club/Company paying the paye and NI as he is registered on 50% of is actual take home pay.

View Comment

Avatar

Stifflers MomPosted on7:28 pm - Sep 16, 2012


TSFM – is this a different ‘sign-up’ from the sign up at the top of the page in the black box? Or am I just thick?

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on7:30 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Douglas – last reply

Nonsense?

On what planet do you do business on?

Players and agents were able to ask for more money and get it form RFC-NIL. Sorry that does not help your cause on here to make Aly who knows the doorman and poor wee Billy who only got the money he asked for – but its the truth.

Say for example players were given an indication that Celtic and Rangers were interested in them – the wages requested would be say 14k a week. Celtic could maybe just pay that amount but need to factor into their budget tax/paye etc – but that would be their limit.

Rangers FC – NIL could then counter with 14K but give him appearence money and such as a bonus via an EBT that paid the player much more than he could have got at Celtic.

See Gavin Rae’s example on RTC link earlier – it woudl be good for you to do some research first.

If there is one thing that struck me on the list of 83 players/staff is how much very ordinary players received.

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on7:40 pm - Sep 16, 2012


Danish Pastry says:

September 16, 2012 at 18:02(Edit)

TSFM says:
September 16, 2012 at 14:11
89 2 Rate This
At the risk of breaking our own rules regarding dicussion about the blog on the current thread, could I inform posters that in response to requests, I have been looking at the possibility of changing the format of the blog to a forum …
———–

Moderation could, potentially, become an even bigger task on a forum, especially if the system of registration is automated – allowing virtually anyone to register, add a bit of graffitti, then swan off. In an ideal world this would be a phpbb-type forum but there is so much vandalism on forums that I really do wonder if it’s a step worth taking, at present.

The solution is probably the ‘trusted member approach’. To be honest, it would be no loss if some of us posted less. I try to curb my own desire to post by asking myself if it is at all relevant or just more unnecessary padding and clutter. Most of it is padding, so I post very little The Groucho Marx adage: “I don’t care to belong to a club that accepts people like me as members” chimes true for some of us. I’m quite happy to read the informed posts along with the great number of anonymous readers. So my concern about a forum is that it could become unfocused and overrun with spurious posters.

PS Why dot com? Dot net, dot info, dot org are all good, as are many others. Com is commercial, hardly relevant anyway
_______________________________________________________________________

All points taken on board DP. Thanks

View Comment

Avatar

CastofThousandsPosted on7:41 pm - Sep 16, 2012


TSFM

Tried to use ‘castofthousands’ as my username. Sytem said it already exists and invited me to a login page where I was required to enter my username/e:mail address and a password. I hadn’t set up my password yet. Am I just stupid or has someone nicked my name?

View Comment

Comments are closed.