Charles Green – What Will Football’s Authorities Do?

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

Elijah Baley subscriber

1,814 Comments so far

torrejohnbhoyPosted on10:23 am - Sep 19, 2012


TheBlackKnight says:
September 18, 2012 at 15:24

CG – *The Rangers/ Sevco chairman

(1) “The debts of the club need to be removed”
(2) “we need to get finance into the club”
(3) ” I need to list the club on an appropriate exchange”
(4) “Until those three hurdles are overcome, I won’t achieve anything and there is a percentage of the newly-enlarged company that will come to me once it is done.”
*************************************************************************************************************************

Hmmmm,,,,,,

1. I though Mr Green glaotingly said *The Rangers / Sevco Franchise were a “debt free *club”?
2. I thought there were several (20?) millionaire/ billionaire investors?
3. “I”?? Strange statement. Is that part of ‘HIS’ agreement for ‘HIM’ to get the NEWCO listed?
4. A newly enlarged company? Whatever could he mean?

I also see Mr Green is having his collar felt somewhat by the FA….. What happens with continual disrepute charges? Two slaps on the wrist?
========================================================================
TBK,
Lots of contradictions once again with our little Yorkshire Pudding.This is true,though.

He said: “I said on day one I wasn’t coming here because I was the Salvation Army and I came here to make money. I make no apology for that and the reality is that any money I make will be in the form of shares but it’s conditional on three things being achieved(see above).

Really spells it out for any fans thinking of investing in this scam.
“Buy shares so I can make money!”

View Comment

incredibleadamsparkPosted on10:24 am - Sep 19, 2012


WOTTPI says:
September 19, 2012 at 09:

Doon the slope says:
September 19, 2012 at 07:15

Thanks for the Green interview.

I keep banging on about it but at the time of the meeting last week the ECA had 201 members. membership was given to another six bringing that total to 207 mafde up of 103 ordinary and 104 associated members. However only 135 attended the meeting in Geneva.

http://www.ecaeurope.com/news/eca-calls-on-member-clubs-to-adhere-to-financial-fair-play-rules/

Given his public statement about 200 clubs Simple questions?
Was Green actually there?
If so was he paying attention?
How many of the 200 / 135 club reps did he talk to telling them of T’Rangers plight?
How many said who are you and what are you doing here?

___________________________________________________________________________

This really annoys me too. So this morning I emailed ECA this:

Hello

I email in the hope that you can be of some assistance. I am interested in obtaining a list of all the clubs that were in attendance at ECA meetings on Thursday 30th August, Monday 10th of September and Tuesday 11th of September. This is merely to satisfy my own curiosity and any information provided would be most appreciated.

Many thanks in advance

Will let you know if I get anything back.

View Comment

ExiledCeltPosted on10:45 am - Sep 19, 2012


neepheid says:

September 19, 2012 at 10:18
Danish Pastry says:
September 19, 2012 at 09:52

I don’t get the ‘had their chips’ reference to the cup defeat. Do Ramsdens also do fish suppers? Or is it a mixed metaphor? By combining pawnbrokers and fish&chip shops you could end up with a banana skin.
==========================
Harry Ramsdens was Yorkshire’s finest fish and chip shop when I worked in Leeds 20 years ago. It became a national chain, branches in Blackpool etc, but I don’t know if they strayed across the border. So quite a good reference.

********

They had one in 1999 last year I was in Edinburgh – it was down by Leith docks – was successful when I was there but I heard it shut down a few years ago

View Comment

LoyalbuddyPosted on10:48 am - Sep 19, 2012


@ CW
Thanks for waiting.
It’s nice of you to be so keen to read my thoughts but to just keep on at me and goading me for a response is akin to some child repeatedly shouting “daaaaaaaaaaaaaaad” to get attention. As for insinuating I’m trolling for simply expressing my opinion – well I’m not even going to rise to that.

I believe the “task in hand” is best expressed from the opening paragraph of the About section:
“The purpose of The Scottish Football Monitor is to pay homage to, and carry on the work of the ground-breaking RangersTaxCase blog (RTC). The aim of the Scottish Football Monitor is to cast a questioning and watchful eye on Scottish Football officialdom and the compliant mainstream media (MSM).”

As for the bigger picture I think we’d all agree that first involves an impartial MSM who are willing to investigate and report on all levels and aspects of Scottish football with honesty and integrity. Such a media with no hidden agenda or perceived bias should then see the footballing authorities facing increased scrutiny which in turn would see real changes made to our beloved game.

In my opinion these thoughts are in line the aims this blog started with and I know other posters have requested we try to stay on topic to avoid diluting the quality of the investigative posts or readers ability to follow the conversation – but if folk don’t like what I have to say, or that I have chosen to say it, then I’m big enough to accept it and move on.

@ John Clarke
It is difficult not to agree with the sentiment in your post BUT I don’t believe this is the correct forum/blog to express those feelings of satisfaction about a particular result.

I watched, laughed and cheered the result last night because it seems new Rangers have not learned from the mistakes of their predecessors and still believe throwing money at the problem will make them successful. So seeing the big wee team (or wee big team) losing to a better 2nd Div team (thanks WOTTPI for the correction) was good to see BUT I personally feel such posts did not belong here as they don’t progress the aims of the blog and if anything are detrimental to those aims because it allows detractors to claim there is an Anti-Rangers agenda rather than a Pro-Footballing one.

@Johnboy
thanks for the support and happy to see you only got 2 TD to my 50

Finally, there certainly were some good posts about CG’s halftime statement and the share issue but whilst posted amongst the other comments it was time consuming and tedious to sort the wheat from the chaff.

View Comment

SparTicketusPosted on10:55 am - Sep 19, 2012


Neepheid 10.18

I think it’s Ramsdens as in ” come and pawn your silverware ” Much more appropriate.

View Comment

stevensanphPosted on10:56 am - Sep 19, 2012


Charlie Brown says:
September 19, 2012 at 10:19

My argument would be that the fair play rules are judged over a 3 year period. Therefore, excessive spending in one season (whether it be 7m, 15m or 500k) is not financial doping, as long as the loss is made back over the next two years.

I would be very surprised if Celtic do not turn a healthy profit this season, in the same way that Saints turned a profit the year after buying Billy Dodds for 500k, cancelling out this debt.

The way it differs from the Rangers situation is that they accumulated a 93m liability over a period of 12 years (by not paying the correct taxes) in their pursuit of trophies.

Now going back to the FFP rules, I think its wrong to dictate how a business runs itself, but there is nothing wrong with the trade body introducing rules which will punish business’ which do not play within the rules. In this case, UEFA seek to do it by banning clubs from Europe who run at a loss over a period of time. It will still allow for calculated gambles, but will not allow this to go unchecked.

My two cents is this is the correct method, and outright banning of ‘debt’ or financial doping is wrong. In limitation, and if controlled it is both correct and healthy.

View Comment

smallteaserPosted on10:59 am - Sep 19, 2012


TSFM says:
September 19, 2012 at 09:00

Guys, I hate to be a party pooper, but I agree with Loyalbuddy & Johnbhoy’s views on the gloating. I also take John Clarke’s point, and I understand the effect of Karma and all that, but it really isn’t what we are about. There are a multitude of places where people can indulge if they are moved to do so, but let’s try to keep that to a minimum here.
===================================================================
This is not “The Times” of blogs or “The Guardian” of blogs, its not even “The Herald” of blogs, its just a blog. There was nothing abusive or offensive in any of the postings in the blogs. There must have been a total of 20 – 30 posts on the QotS result, hardly excessive, in my opinion.
I think as others have already said maybe the name is wrong, I thought the ScottishFOOTBALLMonitor would now and agin discuss FOOTBALL.
Discussing a game is called gloating, this is not the forum for discussing Referees, maybe you could print the point of the blog again so that we can all read, anything now about FOOTBALL appears to be banned.
How come we can “Well done St Johnstone” posts on Saturday, “good luck Motherwell” when they were in Europe, “Yes, Hearts doing well against Liverpool””, but some posts involving either Celtic or Rangers are unfit for this site? Dual standards if I may say.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on11:00 am - Sep 19, 2012


exiledcelt says:
September 19, 2012 at 10:45
 0 0 Rate This
neepheid says:
————

Cheers exile and neepheid, I wasn’t being altogether serious about that. I thought it was funny, the mixed metaphor. Apologies for not adding a smiley face. Thanks for the background though 😉

View Comment

SparTicketusPosted on11:04 am - Sep 19, 2012


TSFM 09.00

Re. gloating. A goading comment below the Scotsman report of last nights game at Ibrox –

“You guys are lucky you formed a new club. Getting beat off of QOS would have been really embarrassing for the old Rangers”

Is that allowed ? A beautifully engineered wind-up with no real possible retort.

View Comment

SeamusPosted on11:06 am - Sep 19, 2012


smallteaser says:
September 19, 2012 at 10:59
1 0 Rate This

Totally Agree 🙂
I’ve had several posts pulled – one for stating I thought TSFM
was getting too handy at deleting posts!!!!

View Comment

smallteaserPosted on11:10 am - Sep 19, 2012


Loyalbuddy says:
September 19, 2012 at 10:48

Finally, there certainly were some good posts about CG’s halftime statement and the share issue but whilst posted amongst the other comments it was time consuming and tedious to sort the wheat from the chaff.
———————————————————————————————-
LB, nobodys here to entertain you, and I won’t apologies if some people wasted your time.
I have read back your postings and was wondering where you tried to steer the blog back to ” the task in hand”. Apart from criticising the content you don’t! That is why you were called a troll.
A 10 minute gloat fest would have moved on, but for your postings.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on11:14 am - Sep 19, 2012


smallteaser says:
September 19, 2012 at 10:59
 0 0 Rate This
TSFM says:
September 19, 2012 at 09:00

Guys, I hate to be a party pooper, but I agree with Loyalbuddy & Johnbhoy’s views on the gloating. I also take John Clarke’s point, and I understand the effect of Karma and all that, but it really isn’t what we are about. There are a multitude of places where people can indulge if they are moved to do so, but let’s try to keep that to a minimum here.
===================================================================
This is not “The Times” of blogs or “The Guardian” of blogs, its not even “The Herald” of blogs, its just a blog. There was nothing abusive or offensive in any of the postings in the blogs. There must have been a total of 20 – 30 posts on the QotS result, hardly excessive, in my opinion.
I think as others have already said maybe the name is wrong, I thought the ScottishFOOTBALLMonitor would now and agin discuss FOOTBALL.
Discussing a game is called gloating, this is not the forum for discussing Referees, maybe you could print the point of the blog again so that we can all read, anything now about FOOTBALL appears to be banned.
How come we can “Well done St Johnstone” posts on Saturday, “good luck Motherwell” when they were in Europe, “Yes, Hearts doing well against Liverpool””, but some posts involving either Celtic or Rangers are unfit for this site? Dual standards if I may say.
———-

Wishing teams well when representing Scotland, fair-minded praise when underdogs win against the odds, pointing out good refereeing – these are all positives and likely to offend no one. Many of us commented on the QOS triumph yesterday. Sometimes it’s not what we say, but how we say it.

I would not agree that this is just a blog, it aspires to be above the rest. That means avoiding even the appearence of anything that could be used to undermine its credibility.

View Comment

WOTTPIPosted on11:20 am - Sep 19, 2012


Loyalbuddy says:
September 19, 2012 at 10:48

Finally, there certainly were some good posts about CG’s halftime statement and the share issue but whilst posted amongst the other comments it was time consuming and tedious to sort the wheat from the chaff.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Well at least there is some wheat to be found here, certainly more than in the MSM, which it is why it is well worth the effort to do the sorting.

Using the two wrongs make a right argument:-

The MSM are paid to report and hopefully investigate on a neutral basis. However in many a fans eyes they have been doing the opposite of gloating by cheering on T’Rangers at every opportunity and are doing all in their powers to avoid asking the hard questions.

This is a blog and as smallteaser says the gloating is neither excessive or abusive.
People will have their moment and then get back to the big issues at hand.

As with the previous RTC site we all go off track for a while when not much is happening. Plenty to look forward to.

A tight SPL at present
Charlie’s disciplinary
World Cup Qualifiers
FTTT
Share issue and associated disclosure of financials
SPL Commission
BDO Investigation starting
Santa

View Comment

Madbhoy24941Posted on11:21 am - Sep 19, 2012


Charlie Brown makes some very valid points regarding overspending but without trying to defend my club too much, the overspend must be looked in in respect to earning potential. An overspend of 5m is nothing to Manchester United over a season, that same 5m would however break FC United of Manchester. That said, I do agree that we should try to spend only what we earn.

The problem for Celtic, much like our own daily lives, we try to balance our finances based not only what is currently in the bank or pocket, but what is coming at the end of the month. Loans for cars or houses are a perfect example of acceptable long term debt, buying a new top of the range BMW while on the minimum wage however, is not. Celtic have assets and they know that should the books not balance at the end of the year, they will sell those assets (McGeady and Ki perfect examples recently).

So was the 7 million gamble worth taking? In Celtic’s case, yes because if it failed then we would have had the assets to cover it. Is that fair to other teams who don’t have that luxury? Probaby not but that doesn’t make it wrong.

View Comment

AngusPosted on11:23 am - Sep 19, 2012


neepheid says:
September 19, 2012 at 10:18

Harry Ramsdens was Yorkshire’s finest fish and chip shop when I worked in Leeds 20 years ago. It became a national chain, branches in Blackpool etc, but I don’t know if they strayed across the border. So quite a good reference.
——–
There was one doon Aberdeen beach – run by Willie Miller, no less.

Willie turned out to be not as good at business as he was at refereeing, and it all went belly up a few years ago.

There was one in Inverness last time I was there too.

View Comment

LoyalbuddyPosted on11:28 am - Sep 19, 2012


Ohh dear. Sorry I brought an opinion to the party (one I guess I wasn’t really welcome at in the first place) As for my lack of posting it’s because I’m here to be educated by the informed and intelligent posters and not entertained as you believe.

I did think my posts were an attempt to bring us back on track and away from the result last night but it seems I failed. More fool me for trying and I should have let the self confessed gloat-fest happen.

ps – I never forced anyone to respond to my posts (I think it was CW who wanted an encore) and if you believe I am trolling then just don’t feed me.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on11:32 am - Sep 19, 2012


WOTTPI says:
September 19, 2012 at 11:20
 0 0 Rate This
Loyalbuddy says:
September 19, 2012 at 10:48
———–

This is a blog and as smallteaser says the gloating is neither excessive or abusive.
———–

I’m not too sure about that – someone was actually accused of being Chic Young on here last night. I was shocked.

View Comment

Charlie BrownPosted on11:33 am - Sep 19, 2012


stevensanph says:
September 19, 2012 at 10:56

Steven – taken to it’s logical consclusion – if you average the Champions League payout at say £20M per season then for arguments sake Rangers, Celtic or Hearts or whoever could overspend and accumulate £60M of debt or deficit spending in a 3 year FFP period as long as they ensured to get 3 years Champions league money to make good the deficit.

Or at the bottom of the SPL clubs could overspend by say £1.5M ie the difference between a season in the SPL v the SFL to try to avoid relegation. A more prudent club might then be relegated whilst the deficit spending club stays up.

Overspending encourages financial recklessness – if all or most clubs do it – as happened in the SPL from 1998 – 2010 then it is the financially prudent clubs who have tended to suffer whilst the overspends mostly but not always reaped the sporting rewards albeit at the risk of an eventual financial implosion or imposition of swingeing cutbacks and debt burden/repayments that then affected their ability to compete in later years. Whichever way you look at it competition is distorted and financial risks can be baked into clubs spending – sometimes by necessity simply to compete or try to compete.

Surely the goal of financial fair play is what those words actually mean and intend ie to encourage clubs to be run sustainably and compete fairly with the money they generate. If they become reliant on prize money or windfall transfer fees to balance the books they are reliant on non guaranteed sources of income to meet their commitments.

My idea would be that prudence would be a better basis for fair-play rules than rules that allow and indeed still encourage clubs to speculate provided they can reap the rewards.

All SPL clubs will begin the season with a certain amount of known cash or income levels ie the guaranteed SPL payment plus whatever season ticket income they have sold plus whatever merchandising or sponsorship or hospitality income etc they have secured. this should be the basis of their spending plans – all other income like SPL prize/placement money, walk up sales, cup money is usually results dependant ie non-guaranteed sources of income as is UEFA competition money and transfer fees. The bulk of clubs spending ie players wages is also known and predictable once the contracts are signed. A prudent system would have basic payments that were matched to clubs guaranteed income and all other payments performance related ie bonuses for league placings, cup progress, uefa qualification etc so that the additional monies earned by clubs performances matched performances related payments to players so earnings and spending is correlated.

There really is no justification for clubs projecting big deficits and relying on debt to gain sporting advantage with the hope that competition prize money or windfall transfer fees will make good any deficits over the FFP period – basically that is creating inherent risks and financial dependancies on more favourable outcomes, it can also be used to gain sporting advantages and disadvantaging other clubs who take less risks or who don’t rely as much on external creditors to fund short term footballing objectives.

View Comment

twopanda bearsPosted on11:37 am - Sep 19, 2012


Nowoldandgrumpy says at 07:35
From twitter
@ShaunGibson1888: The Rangers in deep trouble again http://t.co/GuR3EiEr via @ShaunGibson1888 – The word from contractors who work for Charles Green.

I`m not shy of a pop against the calculated propaganda from the MSM who seem to just be post-boxes for PR misinformation. Numerous times we`ve commented on the MSM “inside source” and so and so “understands” and lately the “English expert on Scots law” who just happens to be fully read up on how it`s impossible for SPL title stripping and all such other MSM / PR pulp nonsense designed to fool all football supporters to flog their rags.

Isn`t this post in the same vein? – Maybe this merits the same treatment?

Kinda difficult to believe they are 600k in debt without a line of credit we know off – Or that Contractors would expose themselves in these chastened times to 600k outlays before stage / interim payments, less still would they talk about it, risking themselves, their colleague’s and their employees work. I could add that if CG made the final purchase payment on 31 July he`s only been in business proper for just over 6 weeks – so these “chatterbox” contractors have been running at 100k per week without payment? Not sure there are many contractors in Glasgow at the moment with such deep pockets and with finance nigh impossible to acquire.

Saying that the numbers don`t work for me and cash flow difficulties are well possible as I and others have posted. And true yesterdays statement on debts to be removed after last weeks debt-free statement is a surprising revelation!. But this one – even without evidentiary substantiation – is weak to say the least – probably gossip and not plausible in such a form.

View Comment

LoyalbuddyPosted on11:38 am - Sep 19, 2012


@TSFM
With the new sign-in procedure would it be prudent to have a general blog area which contributors can post to about any general happenings in Scottish Football (referees, results etc)? It would maintain this blog as the main “go to” Scottish football forum but help to avoid the interesting comments to an educational article going off topic.
I assume mis-placed comments could then be moved to the general blog and vice-versa.

View Comment

tomtomPosted on11:43 am - Sep 19, 2012


Angus says:
September 19, 2012 at 11:23

neepheid says:
September 19, 2012 at 10:18

Harry Ramsdens was Yorkshire’s finest fish and chip shop when I worked in Leeds 20 years ago. It became a national chain, branches in Blackpool etc, but I don’t know if they strayed across the border. So quite a good reference.
——–
There was one doon Aberdeen beach – run by Willie Miller, no less.

Willie turned out to be not as good at business as he was at refereeing, and it all went belly up a few years ago.

There was one in Inverness last time I was there too.

———————————————————

There’s a very fine branch quite close to Ibrox. Usually populated by fans on match days.

View Comment

arabest1Posted on11:48 am - Sep 19, 2012


Alex Thompson shows why is a credible journalist, and will not be intimidated by reactionary bullies. (usual apols if it has already been posted, but it is worth watching)
http://blogs.channel4.com/alex-thomsons-view/mackenzie-hillsborough-lies/2697

View Comment

smallteaserPosted on11:52 am - Sep 19, 2012


Danish Pastry says:
September 19, 2012 at 11:32

This is a blog and as smallteaser says the gloating is neither excessive or abusive.
———–

I’m not too sure about that – someone was actually accused of being Chic Young on here last night. I was shocked.
==============================================
They never denied it!!
Nice to see the blog is “back on track” this morning with the whereabouts of Harry Ramsdens, there was one in East Kilbride, which bankrupted the franchise holder.

View Comment

jockybhoyPosted on12:03 pm - Sep 19, 2012


twopanda bears says: September 19, 2012 at 11:37

It seems from that post it was more like contractors not being paid than “credit” – as you say, they don’t have any anyway.

Now with any “blog” posting we need to be careful of its provenance but give that some of us did some bag of the fag packets’ calculations before the season started and made a guess at the monthly losses Newco would probably make. Spoiler alert: they were all losses!

Maybe some contractors may have believed Green’s “(news) Rangers are debt-free nonsense”? I mean it’s inconceivable Rangers would go bust again… isn’t it?

View Comment

NowoldandgrumpyPosted on12:07 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Surely this is taking things to far?

@bellacaledonia: The BNP in town: http://t.co/FHqOn962

View Comment

WOTTPIPosted on12:07 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Loyalbuddy says:
September 19, 2012 at 11:38

I think it was said a good while back that referees etc were not to be a topic for discussion as it was all ‘subjective’ and their were plenty other sites to deal with those types of gripes.

The same probably goes for the results of games in genral.

However Scotlands poor start to the World Cup campaign and last nights game do have potential repercussions for the whole of Scottish football and are perhaps more sutiable for general discussion.

View Comment

MickyMincePosted on12:11 pm - Sep 19, 2012


test

View Comment

bobcobb74Posted on12:14 pm - Sep 19, 2012


In answer to those who critisize Celtic for posting a £7m loss.

A number of factors need to appreciated here. The first is that Celtic have been pursuing a deliberate policy of developing their own players or buying cheap young talent from abroad for a number of years now – in effect, they have become a “selling club.” When deciding to take the “gamble” in January to maintain the squad and seek CL qualification, this was done safe in the knowledge that Celtic have a number of players worth at least £5m at today’s market values. In fact, they just sold a reserve midfielder for £5.5m to Swansea – a fee not included in last year’s account. Had it been necessary, they could have sold Hooper or Wanyama or Ledley or Kayal or Izaguere; everyone of them is worth a few million. So it was not a gamble. There is a massive difference between sustainable and non-sustainable debt and Celtic’s is very sustainable. In fact, I would go as far as to say that Celtic are a model of how a club in a smaller country should be run. A clear business plan; provision made for lean times and – crucially – fall back options; namely a production line of home grown talent allied to a worldwide scouting network.

I also feel the need to point out that Celtic budget for worst case scenario i.e.no European football at all. Their “Plan B” is to sell a player when required. Mcgeady filled the gap a few years ago and now Ki will do the same. And if we do get European football? then we dont need to sell anyone. Celtic more than live within their means – Peter Lawell could teach Mr Micawber a thing or two about financial prudence.

View Comment

brucePosted on12:23 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Hi,

Please could someone link to the comment which laid out simply why the juninhio ebt has nothing to do with the rangers case.

i need to convince the office bear but cant find it via the search.

Many thanks

View Comment

SnowdogPosted on12:28 pm - Sep 19, 2012


testing

View Comment

AngusPosted on12:30 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Meantime, more thoroughly OT stuff for your light entertainment.

A thread dedicated to coming up with the most unintentionally humourous utternaces of TRFC fans …

http://boards.footymad.net/forum.php?tno=4&fid=27&sty=2&act=1&mid=2114798402&page=1

View Comment

smallteaserPosted on12:32 pm - Sep 19, 2012


I take it the ground staff were TUPE’d to the newco? Just asking as the hoarding where Gus McPherson was interviewed could do with a paint job and i haven’t seen the grass as long at Ibrox since they played Manchester United.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on1:09 pm - Sep 19, 2012


For those of you who miss Craig Whyte, he’s back in the news, sort of …

http://local.stv.tv/glasgow/190908-former-rangers-owner-craig-whyte-gets-his-bentley-back-after-court-seizure/

View Comment

WOTTPIPosted on1:11 pm - Sep 19, 2012


http://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/Article.aspx/2940048

Rangers boss Ally gets a sore one from Queens

Ohh Matron!!!!!!!!!!!

View Comment

iceman63Posted on1:12 pm - Sep 19, 2012


The 7 million overspend by Celtic was not really a gamble at all IMO.

They had invested in young players one or two of whom may have had to be sold to balance the books in the event of non-qualification for Champions League. In that sense the 7 million was an investment – if it worked you got 20 mill back and sold a player for 7 mill anyway, If not you sold a player and balanced the books.

In the old days most Scottish clubs finances were balanced on that basis.

Not illegal, not excessive, not high risk, not financial doping.

I am guessing that had St Joihnstone gone down then the 1.5 mill overspend would have resulted in cuits to playing staff and reduced wages next season in div 1 and not bankruptcy of the club, so again a fairly prudent measured degree of risk.

Financial fair play involves a balancing of the books over three years, it allows for some debt which is managed and reversible should circumstances require it.

Where we see year on year accumulation of debt and a financial model that cannot ever be self-financing coupled with dubious tax practices and constant re-capitalisations then you have a model of financial doping. In Scotland only Rangers sustained that model to catastrophic effect.

Both Hearts and Celtic dallied with unsustainable models of spending but found the resources in Celtic’s case to adopt a sustainable set of finances, and a consolidation of this debt in Hearts’ case with no continued addition to the debt. Hearts finances are precarious but as all debt is owed to Vlad probably not a critical situation.

Where a critical situation may well emerge is if income streams to the clubs decline or are cut off unexpectedly, then major problems will ensue as business models followed will be inappropriate for new circumstances and the finances of clubs are such that most expenses cannot easily, if at all, be cut mid-sdeason, and certainly cannot be hugely cut outwith the transfer widow.

View Comment

Long Time LurkerPosted on1:13 pm - Sep 19, 2012


RTC has been tweeting again:

http://twitter.com/rangerstaxcase

View Comment

Alex CoxPosted on1:22 pm - Sep 19, 2012


I think people are maybe taking Mr Lawwell’s words a wee bit too much on trust. It is true that Neil Lennon was allowed to keep his squad together in order to secure the SPL and from there the CL group place.

However, had they not achieved that Mr Lawwell had the option of selling a few players registrations in order to make up the shortfall.

Yes it was a gamble, but it was a gamble with a back up plan. Had Celtic not qualified for the CL group then I am quite sure another player, in addition to Ki would have left Celtic.

Whatever anyone thinks of Celtic one thing is sure, Celtic are financially well organised and have a board which sticks to it’s plans. Even if a lot of the support don’t agree … a lot of the time.

Celtic will make a healthy profit this season. They will almost certainly use that to clear debt and tidy up the financial situation. To do otherwise would be short term thinking. Celtic will use this period to make themselves healthier for the coming seasons. In the time of plenty it is always best to prepare for the times of famine.

View Comment

JackglasgowPosted on1:40 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Long Time Lurker says:
September 19, 2012 at 13:13

RTC has been tweeting again:
————————————————————————————–

Sorry don’t have twitter access can you post what the content of the tweet is please ?

View Comment

BigrabbitPosted on1:42 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Apologies if this is already known, but it does form a sort of “timeline” of events at Ibrox.
It is a long read ,but a good one, 4 separate posts total 14,744 words but useful for anyone who has not followed this from day 1.

Part 1
http://etims.net/?cat=7&paged=4
Parts -: 2, 3 and 3b.
http://etims.net/?cat=7&paged=3

Ignore the footnote “ In Part 4B” at the end of part 3 this seems to be a typo.
It’s a Wonderful Life!

View Comment

accies80(Harri159)Posted on1:47 pm - Sep 19, 2012


The Ramsdens Cup is sponsored by the pawnbrokers of the same name, not the fish and chip chain. Their colours are green and white, with publicity shots generally centred around the cup decked out in green and white ribbons. Did they throw last night’s game?

View Comment

Charlie BrownPosted on2:00 pm - Sep 19, 2012


The Iceman says:
September 19, 2012 at 13:12

Why did Celtic need to overspend by £7M at all though iceman? same with Rangers – why did/do they run costs at levels higher than income (sans Champions League Group money)? They have comfortably far higher income streams than all other SPL & SFL clubs so why the need to ever overspend? The only valid reason or excuse is they are locked in a spending arms race / competition with each other for limited opportunities to earn lucrative Champions League money.

More importantly why do the football authorities who are charged with & responsible for the good governance of the game in Scotland still permit potentially damaging overspends and clubs to accumulate hidden risks or unfunded liabilities when they sign players and set their spending plans & commitments for the coming season(s)?

The UEFA financial fair play rules are reactive – the SPL rules on notifying failure to pay wages or taxes are reactive – it seems none of the attempts to bring about sound financial governance of football actually mandate it or have any provisions to prevent it except by threatening financial or footballing punishments AFTER THE EVENT.

Simple heuristics like No debt except for infrastructure projects, maximum wage bill 60% of revenues, maximum basic salaries 60% of clubs guaranteed income and retained earnings at the start of the season or specific date etc. all further payments and bonuses are performance related but again not exceeding 60% of total income (guaranteed + variable) earned over the season. No clubs can project annual deficits (+/- 5% error). Clubs should provide a quarterly statement/spreadsheet showing how predicted/actual income and spending plus how any staff or player additions or reductions affect future cash flows and liabilities.

Immediately this would protect all clubs. No club could spend money they weren’t earning or already earned, far fewer if any clubs would suffer insolvency events and would be better insulated against financial shocks or downturns in income levels. better than expected performances and keeping within spending limits would see all clubs run at break-even at worst or else generating small or big profits which would then enable them to pre-fund future spending or else have a positive cash balance in the bank in the event of any future rainy days.

It would reduce or remove the requirement for a sympathetic bank manager or benefactor to bail out or make good financial losses.

Put simply our football clubs would become far more financially robust and less fragile to volatile or worse than expected or hoped for levels of income.

Of course this would also place more restrictions on our clubs to act however they want or make financial gambles or speculate on achieving a certain financial and footballing outcome – regardless of whether this is seen as shrewd if successful or reckless or risky if unsuccessful.

You can never completely eliminate risk but you can attempt to minimize it and avoid contagian or damage to others especially by seeking to avoid scenarios like Gretna or Rangers were drastic action is required just to ensure clubs can complete the season and not throw the entire league and thus others clubs finances into some jeopardy as well.

View Comment

smallteaserPosted on2:27 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Charlie Brown says:
September 19, 2012 at 14:00

I think you are missing who owns the clubs, usually 1 person. The leagues do not own nor can tell that person how to run his/her business, they will not even have the neccesary skills to do so.

View Comment

Fritz AgrandoldteamPosted on2:37 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Blueskies says:
September 19, 2012 at 09:36

Interesting wee item on the BBC news site today

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-19639956
—————————-
I saw that too. Let’s hope it’s not just window-dressing.

View Comment

VandalgreasePosted on2:43 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Lawwell knocks out Traynor in first round!!!

http://harryhood67.wordpress.com/2012/09/19/lawwell-trashes-traynor/

View Comment

J MaclurePosted on2:43 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Can I just comment on the gloating on last nights result?

While it hardly something that the point of the site, I certainly would,nt get hung up about it.
It will always creep in, as long as it is not nasty, people should live with it.

To be honest, last nights performance deserved it, what it served to highlight, that this Rangers, no matter the captures , are a very very ordinary outfit. And this transfer ban will be very hard to negotiate, unless a few of the young bucks suddenly mature very very quickly.

Really the position Rangers are in now, to me, it beggars belief can say that Rangers have not been punished, all that is happened is merely the consequences. These consequences will take years to recover from. In the meantime, whether, you admit it or not Scottish Football will suffer financial hardship.

The bells are ringing all over the place.

View Comment

twopanda bearsPosted on2:50 pm - Sep 19, 2012


jocky bhoy says: at 12:03
twopanda bears says: at 11:37

It seems from that post it was more like contractors not being paid than “credit” – as you say, they don’t have any anyway.
Now with any “blog” posting we need to be careful of its provenance but give that some of us did some bag of the fag packets’ calculations before the season started and made a guess at the monthly losses Newco would probably make. Spoiler alert: they were all losses!
Maybe some contractors may have believed Green’s “(news) Rangers are debt-free nonsense”? I mean it’s inconceivable Rangers would go bust again… isn’t it?
_______

Not disagreeing in principle JB – It’s possible, true.
But equally, it could be late payments to sub-contractors and nothing to do with CG at all.

Had to laugh as your last paragraph is incontestable in fact. If they believed – and enough did – about wealth of the radar billionaires and so on and so on – then anything at all is possible!

Of course it`s conceivable they could go bust again. I too did fag packet calculations – well more than that –. But there`s too much missing at the moment to be definitive. I still say cash flow is the bugbear with high overheads in early trading. In fairness though – post the SDM era – who knows? – A bank, even a foreign one – could come in and support CGs business balancing first year trading losses over a term.

Mentioned earlier are references to “debts need to be removed” yesterday in the CG statement. Again, without a line of credit that we know of it is a fair observation to consider that CGs Investors could regard their input as short term loans – a logical assumption that can be derived from that statement – It may not be true or exactly true – but that`s not necessarily negative comment to their supporters in that any share issue could possibly put the club back into exclusively shareholders hands if the original investors are in fact short term.

However – like others – not convinced of the reality of a share issue especially with disclosures and so much to be cleared up shall we say. But that`s not to say there isn`t merit in the Genkos? and the other share consultants appointment. Some business`s test their assumptions and optimism by subjecting to external assessment’s from the hard-nosed financial market`s analysts. Often gives them pointers even if no share issue materialises.

At the end of the day, the financial aspects are their business. Our business is the impacts to Association Football, how the rules are applied, how the finances are split between clubs and so on. There`s no harm in developing a sensible balanced dialogue to counter the pulp nonsense we`re expected to endure. My personal interest is challenging false Media disinformation informed by placed agendas that have served no-one well to date – and frankly needs to be corrected if any progress is expected.

p/s – I was incensed by jabbers diatribe Monday. He threw the kitchen sink in there so much it read valedictorian. I had penned a riposte for this blog but feared TSFM would bar me for life!

View Comment

NeilRPosted on3:10 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Webster says:
September 19, 2012 at 14:52

Guidi doesn’t say “I hope it’ll kick off” if titles are stripped; he stutters slightly and says “it’ll….it’ll kick off”. At least that’s how I hear it, quite clearly (it seems to me) even although Jim D is talking over Guidi at that moment.

View Comment

Charlie BrownPosted on3:13 pm - Sep 19, 2012


smallteaser says:
September 19, 2012 at 14:27
Charlie Brown says:
September 19, 2012 at 14:00

I think you are missing who owns the clubs, usually 1 person. The leagues do not own nor can tell that person how to run his/her business, they will not even have the neccesary skills to do so.
============================================================================

smallteaser – it does seem beyond the will of the ability of the English Football league to devise and implement some fairly rigourous financial rules far beyond anything UEFA or the SPL/SFA have come up with thus far – please see the article below particularly the parts about Salary Cost Management Protocol being implemented for League One & Two and the requirement for Budgetary Proposals and Updates throughout the year/season.

http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/FLExplainedDetail/0,,10794~2748246,00.html

View Comment

Jimbo milliganPosted on3:16 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Really the position Rangers are in now, to me, it beggars belief can say that Rangers have not been punished, all that is happened is merely the consequences. These consequences will take years to recover from. In the meantime, whether, you admit it or not Scottish Football will suffer financial hardship.

==============

But what has happened thus far to rangers are merely consequences . That is a fact . So how can it beggar belief ?

Scottish football will suffer financial hardship , but whats the alternative ? Turn a blind eye to the rules of the game and let rangers back in the SPL so everythings hunky dory again (which it clearly wasnt before)

The trophies will be removed and sevco can start the process of working their way back to respectability in the scottish game .

View Comment

Doon the slopePosted on3:22 pm - Sep 19, 2012


J McLure

“In the meantime, whether, (sic) you admit it or not Scottish Football will suffer financial hardship.”

———————————————————————-

Hearts, Dundee Utd, Celtic, Dunfermline all owed money by Rangers. Many teams in debt because they tried to keep up with Rangers not knowing that they were cheating all along.

Up to £150 million owed to HMRC and an assortment of footballing creditors (and the rest.)

Rangers have been royally screwing Scottish football for more than ten years.

Even now, Sevco indulge in the exact same fiscal policies of its discredited biological parent, attempting to outspend the lower tier football clubs.

I say the opposite is true. For the first time in a decade, Scottish football has the chance to recover itself financially from “Rangers.”

View Comment

stmileyPosted on3:27 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Webster

On the SSB REWIND page, if your right click on the episode you want and select open in new window, it gives you a new player – you can then click on any time you want, saves you using fastforward.

View Comment

timtimPosted on3:51 pm - Sep 19, 2012


M GUIDI: Rangers fans will be up in arms and I hope it’ll kick off.”

just listened to it(x 5)and he definately said the above
quite shocking !!

View Comment

jockybhoyPosted on4:11 pm - Sep 19, 2012


twopanda bears says: September 19, 2012 at 14:50
jocky bhoy says: at 12:03
twopanda bears says: at 11:37

In truth I was playing a wee bit of Devil’s Advocate. I assume the reported 36,000 season tix will given Sevco the readies to make to to Christmas at least. I wrote ages back that it’s ironic that the cost of upkeep of the 5-star jewel in What Was Rangers crown, Ibrox itself, may be the poisoned chalice that finally does for them.

Irony – like goldy but made of iron. And funnier.

View Comment

timtimPosted on4:14 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Another point re last nights game
Rfc* outfield players were not displaying the 5 stars on there jersey but Alexander was
why ?
also noticed Durrants tracksuit top had the 5 stars showing

View Comment

jockybhoyPosted on4:15 pm - Sep 19, 2012


OK – one for the beacounters (not just Essex btw):

Celtic’s “headline” loss of £7m is not because they spent an additional £7m – it’s an accounting/balance sheet loss mostly based on the amortisation of player contracts (my thanks to Paul67 at CQN for his years of teaching about amortisation) – hence why debt isn’t up the same amount.

This is one of the reasons why Financial Fairplay HAS to run over a few years – the peaks and troughs are extreme based on bookkeeping rules apllication to football.

I am not an accountant but the following are some of the key points relating to players contracts and their “the books” as I understand them (which is of course not necessarily correct). Please feel free to correct me if I have any of this wrong. I’d prefer it if corrections were made in a civil manner 🙂

=> A player is bought for say £4m and is given a 4 year contract. At the end of the 4 years he can walk for nothing. This means that, in accounting terms the £4m value on the books loses £1m a year over the 4 year contract to zero (Bosman).

=> Selling a player who cost a transfer fee shows a net selling price against what was amortised – so the £4m player 2 years down the line is actually worth £2m on “the books”, the team having lost £1m a year in each of the previous years. He is then sold for £3m. The “books” that year will show a £1m profit for that year – £3m gained that season against a value of £2m even though in everyone’s head it’s a £1m loss.

=> If a player who only had a few months to run on his contract renegotiated a four year deal, his value would go from effectively zero, to whatever his transfer value would then be. If he signed a 4 year deal and had a market worth of say £3m, the “books” would show a “profit of £3m” that year, but a loss of £750k in each of the following 4 years.

=> Equally a player who arrived for nothing through the youth system for example is sold for £7m – that’s a pure £7m profit on the books. Question:But if he renegotiates his initial contract into a new 5 year one, based on his worth of £7m does that mean he’s now costing the team £1.4m a year for 5 years instead? That hardly seems fair.

=> Ki Example (;)) Ki’s £5m next year will arrive in whatever cash instalments have been negotiated, but wont appear as £5m on the balance-sheet. It is this disconnect that sometimes fans don’t get – we sold a player fo £x, thechairman said all money from sales will go to buy new players, but we only spent £y…

OK. Tin hat, on. Fire away…

View Comment

Charlie BrownPosted on4:34 pm - Sep 19, 2012


jocky bhoy says:
September 19, 2012 at 16:15

jocky -the obvious implication is that if you are amortising player contracts at 25% of value (4 year contract) or 33.33% ( 3 year deal etc) then at some previous point in time the net transfer spending must have been significantly higher than net transfer receipts at some point in time if it’s creating multi-million pound paper or accounting losses by depreciating the balance sheet value of the playing squad………….either way you are still quantifying a loss or a proportional loss ie just like your new car immediately loses some of it’s value the moment you drive it off the forecourt. To create losses spending must at some point in time (or in aggregate over a period of time) be higher than transfer receipts (ie profits captured on players).

View Comment

Livia BurlandoPosted on4:44 pm - Sep 19, 2012


miki67 says:
September 19, 2012 at 13:27
4 0 Rate This
In a plethora of truly incredibe Popeye-like statements, the most insulting of Green’s was, “… the stupidity of Scotland.
………………………………………………………………………………………..

His claim that they are bringing communities like Annan ‘back to life’ is also pretty insulting.

Why is he doing this? why is he setting out to be as obnoxious and infuriating as possible to absolutely everyone? Remember the ‘walking through the leagues’ remark? And that was in a prepared statement! I can see why having a go at the football authorities is appealing to his supporters but why the insult the whole country, both as a whole and individually? Seriously, he’s either got really poor diplomatic and social skills or it’s part of his act, but if the second, why? what does it achieve?

View Comment

jockybhoyPosted on4:59 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Accepted Charlie Brown – I was thinking about the headline £10m spent on players last year and the subsequent battering this year’s balance sheet will show for that. i.e. just trying to show Celtic didn’t go out and blow an additional £7m cash. Last year Celtic “spent” a ton on players but posted a profit, this year they “spent” less on players but posted a significant loss…

Q: Do balance sheets show a net zero change in year 1? i.e I spend £10m on players but I then have £10m assets, ergo, no change to balance sheets? (as opposed to cash flow)

This is the type of stuff I enjoyed on RTC – any day you learn something new is a good day, and given the rest of my day has been an absolute @rse, I’m looking for anything good!

View Comment

insidewingerPosted on5:01 pm - Sep 19, 2012


jocky bhoy says:
September 19, 2012 at 16:15

JB, your 3rd paragraph is wrong. The book value of a player who signs a new deal will not be upped to his perceived market value. His remaining value (from the original contract) will now however be amortised over the new duration of the contract. If he receives signing money for the new contract, which many players do, or if the club pays his agent a fee, which again happens often, that cost will be added to the remining book value of the original contract and be amortised.

View Comment

Geordie BhoyPosted on5:06 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Conspiracy theories?

I was out last night so missed the Sevco vs. Queen of the South game. I came back to find the result, thought “it would have been great to see that game!” and out of chance, checked yesterday’s TV listings. There it was, shown live by BBC Alba. I checked on the BBC iPlayer this morning (about 11 o’clock) and the programme was available to watch. At the time, I tried to download it but was not allowed to. “Not to worry,” I thought, “I’ll catch it later.”

So, ten minutes ago, I went back on to the iPlayer to watch it … and it has been pulled from the list with a “Coming Soon” tagline. Does anyone know why? Or managed to watch it on the iPlayer? When I looked this morning, it did come with a “Strong language” warning. Dundee’s SPL game is still there, available to be watched …

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on5:15 pm - Sep 19, 2012


timtim says:
September 19, 2012 at 15:51
 7 1 Rate This
M GUIDI: Rangers fans will be up in arms and I hope it’ll kick off.”

just listened to it(x 5)and he definately said the above
quite shocking !!
——–

I have it on my iPod and have played it back at half speed quite a few times. He says “it’ll” twice while the other guy says “yeah” about 3 times while he’s speaking. I don’t hear the words “I hope”.

View Comment

Charlie BrownPosted on5:19 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Jocky,

If you buy a player for £4M but sell him for £3M in year 3 yes you make a £1M profit in year 3 (£3M – £2M residual value) but in years 1 & 2 you accounted £1M losses each year ie -2M so your £1M profit – £2M accrued losses = £1M loss on the player over the term of his stay at the club. Basically buying price minus selling price = overall profit/loss on the player.

View Comment

taxman comethPosted on5:19 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Worth bringing this up again:
http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/09/18/on-possible-gratuitous-alienations-good-faith-and-sevco-shuffling/

To make a point about THE most frustrating thing about the internet bamposts – it’s all well and good bumping our gums and thinking up great questions the MSM should be asking but it don’t get us any further.

Is anyone on here capable of taking the excellent questions contained in Paul’s blog and actually getting the answers?

View Comment

jonnyodPosted on5:47 pm - Sep 19, 2012


timtim says:
September 19, 2012 at 16:14

Another point re last nights game
Rfc* outfield players were not displaying the 5 stars on there jersey but Alexander was
why ?
also noticed Durrants tracksuit top had the 5 stars showing
===================================================================
I noticed this also ,they also had to wear their training gear for their first away game this season (BR, I think ) after their two strips clashed with the home sides kit .

I also noticed that the outfield players had a mixture of shorts with and without the five stars above the badge .I don,t know what is going on regards the kit provided but it really looks like a bunch of local boys wearing donated kit .

View Comment

essexbeancounterPosted on5:52 pm - Sep 19, 2012


jocky bhoy says:

September 19, 2012 at 16:15

Rate This

OK – one for the beacounters (not just Essex btw):
==============================================================

JB…no need for any tin hat as far as I am concerned.

I do commend your efforts and understanding the accounting treatment involved here and credit to Paul67 for “spreading the word” in words of one syllable which both the MSM (no laughing at the back!) and I can understand.

I would however, point out two areas of possible confusion arising from the accounting information put into the public domain by all club/corporate entities, as well as Celtic:

1) The “accounting policy” adopted by the Club(s) must be publicly stated and be consistent with that adopted by other clubs, otherwise cross-club comparison is impossible.

2) The tax treatment of the policies in question must also be consistent with HMRC accepted practices as regards the definition of trading income/expenditure (please no one even mention EBTs!) as opposed to capital expenditure.

I must assume that Celtic would adopt a conservative and acceptable approach to this area, after all their boards are well populated by accountants.

However, within the limits of commercial and accounting common sense, a club may adopt any policy it likes, as long as it accounts correctly for the tax treatment…now where have I heard that little nugget before…?

I hope my paltry post helps.

View Comment

justiceintegrityPosted on5:52 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Webster says:

September 19, 2012 at 17:41

I have listened to it and he says about titles been stripped “Rangers fans will be up in arms and it will kick off” and at the same time someone else on panel interludes with “civil war”.

Hope that helps..

View Comment

timtimPosted on5:54 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Webster says:
September 19, 2012 at 17:41
——————-
If you listen to the link you posted it can clearly be heard he says “I hope”
I have just re-listened to the original link on SSB rewind and it has been altered to “its its”
the difference is there for all to hear
SSB have altered the original to cover up Guidis faux pas from earlier today
the evidence provided by you nails them
well done

View Comment

torrejohnbhoyPosted on6:02 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Webster says:
September 19, 2012 at 17:41

Re Radio Clyde/Mark Guidi last night…

I can’t really believe he said “I hope it’ll” (even though it sounds rather like that) but nor do I think it’s “it’l it’ll” either! So have emailed SSB asking them to put me straight.

For those not wanting to search too hard for it on the website, the 30 seconds in question are here:
http://www.btinternet.com/~k.miller18/ssb18th.mp3

Sure radio Clyde will sort it out soon!
___________________________________________________________________________
For what it’s worth,Webster,I’ve listened to the clip and I agree that’s what it sounds like but I’ve been known to be wrong before.just ask my wife! 😆

My copy of “Downfall” finally arrived today.that’s the bedtime reading sorted for a wee while.

View Comment

nowoldandgrumpyPosted on6:09 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Charlie is in the States wanting to talk to US Sevco fans in regard to the share issue.

Sounds like desperation to me.

View Comment

Charlie BrownPosted on6:10 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Essex beancounter says:
September 19, 2012 at 17:52
0 0 Rate This
========================================================================

precisely the reason why the football authorities should mandate a uniform & simplified standard set of accounting information that all clubs should and must provide concerning their operating income and expenditure, liabilities and cash-flow so that all clubs can be compared on a like for like comparison and to ensure that clubs can be evaluated to see if they are operating within key metrics like % of wages / income etc. The English Football League have implemented a set of budgetary and financial information clubs must provide and in future will refuse to accept player registrations if clubs are failing to achieve agreed parameters or would do so by agreeing contracts or future liabilities that would push them outwith safe / agreed limits.

View Comment

ExiledCeltPosted on6:19 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Have to say I heard “I hope” as well – and I have to ask why the anger when he said Celtic fans will be angry, the caller said Not just Celtic fans, I never said I was a Celtic fan – to which Guidi reacted “I never said you were…”

Good for the caller – apparently it’s supposed to be just Celtic fans who want to know the truth and see justice in this case – on another itemm it the same lie – that its only Liverpool fans that are interested in Hillsborough Justice for the 96..

No – both case are cover ups and conivence from the powers that be (Maggie in one case – Salmond will be shown in the other) in their desire to get their way for political goals – all at the expense of the little man.

And before the wolves descend in me for saying they are not comparable – I agree on the human element for sure. Cheating the tax payers out of 130 million quid is not the same as covering up the deaths of 96 people. Loss of life is never the same as loss of money – same as the disasters at Ibrox and Bradford are more horrific loss than money – however, with money injected into stadia in all cases, the horrible loss of life and injuries might never have happened maybe.

However, as a lad I was raised with the belief that the BBC was the standard of truth, that British press was free and we had freedom of speech that no one in the Eastern Bloc or USA had.

Of course the miners strike coverage put that myth to bed for me personally.

As we can see in the phone hacking, Hillsborough and The Rangers Tax Scandal – the MSM and the Govt have been complicit in not ensuring that the true course of law is followed for political means. Thye have conspired to treat us like spoon fed idiots with TV for the hard of thinking based on celebrities and 5 secs of fame. The BBC used to export dramas, comedy shows and news to USA public broadcast stations – now they don’t bother.

The Govt and British Press and British Broadcasters – BBC, ITV and Sky – are all complicit in making our nation a bunch of nomads watching intellectuals like Ant and Dec or an aging Bruce introducing Robboe Savage as an expert in dancing. What a gang of thieves!

May they all hang their heads in shame

View Comment

ExiledCeltPosted on6:28 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Highlights can be seen here of T’Rangers v QOS (not Question of Sport as Ally would hope!)

View Comment

MickyMincePosted on6:34 pm - Sep 19, 2012


emailed Alan Taylor, Editor of Scottish Review of Books, earlier this afternoon suggesting that he fills the gap in reviews of Phil Mac’s Downfall. Received this reply:

Dear

By coincidence have just commissioned a review of Downfall which — here’s hoping – will appear in the November issue of the SRB.

aye

Alan

Not just any review but a SRB review!

View Comment

justiceintegrityPosted on6:37 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Must be listening to a different sound bite but I don’t hear the words “I hope”..

View Comment

torrejohnbhoyPosted on6:40 pm - Sep 19, 2012


Heard on BBC Scotland around 5.30pm
“An SPL chairman(un-named of course)thinks Hearts should not be allowed to sign players if they can’t pay their wages,and he has lots of support from other SPL chairman.

Well last year,and this,a club also deliberately:
Withheld PAYE/NIC/VAT,
Withheld transfer payments to other Scottish clubs,
Withheld transfer payments to foreign clubs,
Withheld payments to over 200 creditors,
Withheld gate receipts to other Scottish clubs
Were allowed to form a new club and to keep their name and granted entry to Scottish football even though they met no criteria,
Were allowed to register a player after the Transfer window closed,even though they were subject to a transfer embargo.
plus anything else you can think of.

Question is:
Why did un-named chairman and his alleged supporters not speak up when all this was going on?.

View Comment

Comments are closed.