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
Smallteaser
Ex ref Jeff??? Winters ,how long has Jeff been retired ,Mr Brian Winters retired at the end of last season.
RTC back on Twitter:
Rangers Tax-Case @rangerstaxcase
For all the PR ‘fight back’ in the mainstream media from the ex-RFC establishment- Traynor, Johnston etc. the key facts remain clear…
Rangers Tax-Case @rangerstaxcase
Rangers’ directors knew their implementation of EBT scheme was illegal and went to great lengths to hide how it worked from SPL & govt.
tomtom
I got her a nice ‘Eastern Star’ necklace – what did you get the granny?
I’ll give you a ‘nod and a wink’ in ‘Chambers’ – you’ll know its me by my
nice ‘Compass and Square’ round my neck and the obligatory ‘Ring’ on
my finger. If that fails I’ll shout out ‘how aulds yir granny’ 🙂 Being in
‘Chambers’ though everyone would answer :-).
Joking aside I’d love to out everyone of these sad fuds 🙂
smallteaser says:
September 12, 2012 at 13:17
‘..I take it that attending this commission or any others would add no value to the creditors and indeed would accumulate costs, therefore they cannot attend.’
——-
Fair enough, I suppose. ( mutter, mutter, mutter ..) 🙂
iki says:
September 12, 2012 at 08:51
8 0 Rate This
iki says:
September 11, 2012 at 23:44
4 0 Rate This
Goosy says:
September 11, 2012 at 23:40
He knew RFC were insolvent in 2011.
———–
Was this while he was Chairman?
=========
I am reposting this.
If the answer is ‘yes’, then was he acting unlawfully by continuing to trade?
=======
I am not stalking you, honest.
I am genuinely interested that you should say that with no qualification or question mark.
MDCCCLXXXVIII says:
September 12, 2012 at 13:27
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-19569680
————————————————————————-
Sorry, an announcement does not equate to a verdict.
———————————————————————
Sorry if I’ve misread this wrong…..
“…BBC Scotland has learned that a verdict on the First Tier Tax tribunal between Rangers and HM Revenue & Customs is expected in October.”
————————————————————————————–
“…The Scottish Courts Service said an announcement will be made next month.”
What the “BBC has learned” and what the “Courts Service said” are two distinct, possibly different things.
Jimbo milligan says:
September 12, 2012 at 12:55
AJ wouldnt need to be so oblique if he wanted to make a masonic appeal to the panel .
——–
He wasn’t being oblique. He was being excessively overt, if anything.
Meanwhile, our colleagues at RM are dissecting Roger Mitchell’s “Herald” piece with their usual intelligent banter:
“Lying Mhedia scumball Jouenalist defends corrupt Football Organisation againat Truth telling Football Club CEO.
Anyone see the Irony in this?
Now take this sh!ite and shove it where the Sun doesnr shine
See you in Court you hypocrytical scumball.
Facts are everything was declared unlike somw things at Porkheed.”
Jockbhoy
The problem with using the Sunday Times Rich List as an accurate measure of individual wealth, is that is nothing more than a semi educated guess at someone’s position.
Murray’s estimate would be mostly made up of the equity he held in various companies. These are effectively only bits of paper, that might provide salary or dividends until the shares were sold , in return for cash or shares in another company.
The reality is that every single one of Murray’s business’ are worth nothing. His equity value was incinerated systematically and quickly from 2008 onwards. Given what’s known about Murray, then it’s fair to calculate that as much as £400 million of this semi educated guess at his worth, was held in equity in private companies. The value of that now is £0
Rangers area good example. His shareholding was valued at £65 million, and changed hands for £1. This mirrors the reduction in value at MIH and other private business he held equity in.
That takes us to other assets. Privately held property in particular. Murray was addicted to debt, and the information I have is that his privately owned property was also very heavily mortgaged. The Sunday Times , do not and could not estimate the size of mortgage debt. However given Murrays propensity to debt, and the fall in property values since 2008, it wouldn’t be unreasonable to assume there was very little equity value in this portfolio .
Murray certainly received a large salary and dividends for a 6 or 7 year period. However given his lifestyle and overhead, I doubt this would leave much more than £15 million ( my educated guess) of readily accessible liquidity.
In other words Murray has no capacity , and never had, to settle a demand from HMRC on behalf of Rangers. Alastair Johnston is an executive at a large US Corporation. Nothing I am saying now would be a surprise to him, either now or from mid 2008 onwards
Johnston is at it. Green is at it. McCoist is at it. Deliberately deception is part of their game plan. However, it won’t work. Thanks to the efforts of RTC, CQN and other excellent blogs, including this one , the public know that the MSM are not the source of truthful information and insight with regards to Rangers.
There are thousands of bloggers who are not bought off or deliberately blinded to the truth. Many many Rangers supporters don’t want to know the truth, or as Jack Nicholson said when playing Colonel Jessup in A Few Good Men , ” they can’t handle the truth”
For the rest of us, including those Rangers supporters who are not blinkered, then the truth has to come out. The actions of Murray and Whyte have to be laid bare. The role played by Ogilvie, and others who were on SFA and SPL boards has to be detailed
And above all the appropriate price has to be paid. Then and only then will justice for Scottish Football have been done and it will have been seen to have even done.
Everyone deserves that, whether they can handle it or not
Edgar Blamm says:
September 12, 2012 at 13:35
‘.Rangers’ directors knew their implementation of EBT scheme was illegal and went to great lengths to hide how it worked from SPL & govt.’
—
There’s a wee phrase echoing in my head, something like “cover your work”. Wonder in what context I heard it? 🙂
The first line says a “verdict” is expected in October.
MDCCCLXXXVIII says:
September 12, 2012 at 13:20
BBC: “In 2010, the previous owners of Rangers contested an unpaid tax …”
——–
Shouldn’t that be “the owners of the previous Rangers”?
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
September 12, 2012 at 13:01
another wee observation in the propaganda war
the SPL investigation is being referred to as an investigation into EBTs and their use. One line of “defence” is that the tribunal hasn’t returned a verdict yet, how can the SPL judge
this stance will be maintained in the hope that the FTT lets RFC off the hook
however, that won’t impact the SPL investigation, as this is into non disclosed payments
at that point (should it happen) they will claim the SPL have moved the goalposts are are simply being vindictive, RFC “won” the FTT but the SPL – driven on by Celtic – still want those titles
of course, the FTT is going to crucify them, but get ready for the switcheroo if it works out well for them
the 2 investigations are NOT related
_________________________________________________________________________
Wholly agree but if the two processes had been carried out in tandem the outcomes of one could have provided relevant information to the other and vice versa. (One hopes that the tax authorities have been given access to SPL and SFA records)
I am with Mr Charles on questioning why has it taken the footballing authorities so long to undertake their investigation. It could be because they have allowed HMRC to see their books & info and as such have been asked or indeed wanted to hold off until the FTTT is concluded.
However if the SPL get their act together they may just be able to publish some initial findings in time for the FTTT result in October to deliver a double whammy.
bestdressedchicken says:
September 12, 2012 at 12:34
It certainly does DP. I wonder what RM’s login is?
_____________________________________________________
I had to look up the article myself. Come on Roger, out yourself you rascal!
smallteaser says:
September 12, 2012 at 13:52
0 0 Rate This
MDCCCLXXXVIII says:
September 12, 2012 at 13:27
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-19569680
————————————————————————-
Sorry, an announcement does not equate to a verdict.
———————————————————————
Sorry if I’ve misread this wrong…..
“…BBC Scotland has learned that a verdict on the First Tier Tax tribunal between Rangers and HM Revenue & Customs is expected in October.”
————————————————————————————–
“…The Scottish Courts Service said an announcement will be made next month.”
What the “BBC has learned” and what the “Courts Service said” are two distinct, possibly different things.
—————————————————————————————
Okay fair do’s, that said, I would be genuinely surprised if the Courts Service were simply declaring today that they would make an announcement in October confirming that the verdict will be published at a later date.
Nawlite says:
September 12, 2012 at 13:57
The first line says a “verdict” is expected in October.
===============================================
Here are the two lines from the article.
What id the announcement from the Courts service say “There will be an announcement next month (November)”, that is not a verdict, its an announcement.
“…BBC Scotland has learned that a verdict on the First Tier Tax tribunal between Rangers and HM Revenue & Customs is expected in October.”
“…The Scottish Courts Service said an announcement will be made next month.”
Angus says:
September 12, 2012 at 13:57
3 0 Rate This
MDCCCLXXXVIII says:
September 12, 2012 at 13:20
BBC: “In 2010, the previous owners of Rangers contested an unpaid tax …”
——–
Shouldn’t that be “the owners of the previous Rangers”?
——————————————————————————-
LOL – that was very good.
With the live release of the Apple Iphone 5 and the release of documents from the Hillsborough enquiry a good day for any bad news.
Any sign of a press release from the SPL independent commission yet???
Doesn’t look as if Rhaman, Spency, Chris or anyone else is at Hampden today just in case.
slightly OT
https://twitter.com/WelshDalaiLama/status/245866207599792128/photo/1
Angus says:
September 12, 2012 at 13:57
3 0 Rate This
MDCCCLXXXVIII says:
September 12, 2012 at 13:20
BBC: “In 2010, the previous owners of Rangers contested an unpaid tax …”
——–
Shouldn’t that be “the owners of the previous Rangers”?
================================================
When Rover Group went into administration the administrators sold the brand names to a Chinese company. SAIC are the current owners of the MG brand. Rover Group are the previous owners of the MG brand.
When The Rangers Football Club plc (the club) went into administration the administrators sold the brand names to an English company. Sevco Scotland – renamed The Rangers Football Club Ltd(the club) – are the current owners of the Rangers brand. The Rangers Football Club plc (the club) – renamed RFC2012 plc – are the previous owners of the Rangers brand.
SAIC have no corporate links (other than the purchased brand name and trademarks) with Rover Group.
Sevco Scotland – renamed The Rangers Football Club Ltd(the club) have no corporate or sporting links (other than the purchased brand name and trademarks) with The Rangers Football Club plc (the club) – renamed RFC2012 plc.
It should actually have been:
BBC: “In 2010, the previous owners of the Rangers brand contested an unpaid tax …”
1.iki says:
September 12, 2012 at 13:50
Goosy says:
September 11, 2012 at 23:40
He knew RFC were insolvent in 2011.
———–
Was this while he was Chairman?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
September 12, 2012 at 08:01
“Now of course if certain actions and activities were authorised and conducted on the orders of only one or two directors and without the knowledge of the rest….. then that is a different matter.
For example– who approved Bain’s ever changing remuneration package ( remember it always seemed to change by letter and addendum rather than a new contract document from scratch ) and who authorised or recommended payments to Graham Souness years after he left the club and why?
The Board minutes alone will make for very interesting reading.”
,,,,,,,,,,,,
I believe that’s exactly what was happening
ie SDM made all the big decisions including selling RFC to Whyte and personally negotiating EBTs. One or more of the other Directors were no doubt involved some of the time but none of them resigned over an issue
Bain may have been frequently “consulted”, and may even have politely objected. But he will have been overruled most of the time.
I suspect most of the RFC Board minutes will not reveal a great deal of independent decision making. Indeed managing the biggest single issue facing the club pre Whyte (the FTT) was removed from the RFC Board by SDM and conducted by MIM. If there ever was a resigning issue for the entire board it was this action by SDM. But nobody resigned
Even so it beggars belief that a business could operate with a massive HMRC debt under appeal and yet make no provision. This is trading while insolvent The fact that there was an appeal did not remove the debt. So why did the RFC Board carry on as if there was no HMRC debt?
Because they saw themselves as pawns of SDM who appointed them in the first place
The Nurembourg defence
We need look no further than Chelsea FC to see how a business can run at a loss year in year out and be technically trading while insolvent. As long as there is evidence that the owner coughed up in the past it is very difficult for the Board to presume he won`t do so again
So did the RFC Board discharge their legal responsibilities?
Definitely not.
iki says:
September 12, 2012 at 08:51
He knew RFC were insolvent in 2011.
———–
Was this while he was Chairman?
=========
I am reposting this.
If the answer is ‘yes’, then was he acting unlawfully by continuing to trade?
,,,,,,,,,,
My recollection was that a Director( AJ or MB?) admitted publicly that the RFC Board considered Administration in 2010. Perhaps someone could provide the link
Grant Thornton would not sign off the 2010 2011 accounts We still await the reason but informed posters on RTC reckoned it was trading while insolvent in 2010 2011 and still in that state after the takeover
As for acting unlawfully I think you should ask a lawyer
longtimelurker says: September 12, 2012 at 12:21
5 1 i Rate This
I bought 500 shares at Fergus McCann’s divestment, cost me £1500 and is the single worst investment/purchase I have ever made.
You kept Celtic alive and your shares are still owrht something -(more than a Rangers shareholder can say). Knowing you kept the club formed in 1888 alive and formed the foundtation for it’s future success is a better return than my investments have made…
🙂
Goosy @ 14:43
Goosy, I don’t have a link, but that is what he did admit to
He also said that the motion was defeated by one vote
A bit confused here gentlemen, re the whole FTT process.
Last month Alex Thomson,quoting the Ministry of Justice stated that a decision would be announced this month, viz September.
Today BBC Scotland quotes the Scottish Courts Service claiming a decision is expected next month, viz October.
Now as someone who laboured for months under the misapprehension that the FTT was some form of super-duper appeal system, under the aegis of HMRC, I do not want to be unsure in the future.
Which government department is responsible for the FTT decision involving Rangers and is the SCS simply to all intents and purposes, simply a subdivision of the MoJ?
nowoldandgrumpy says:
September 12, 2012 at 08:16
The Roger Mitchell article is interesting. CG certainly rattled his cage and kudos to the Herald for printing his response.
It makes a great reference point for any callers to radio phone-in pundits “Which of the facts do you disagree with?”
With the FTT due in October (or at least announcing a date in October depending on your take of the journalist’s grammar & phrasing), perhaps more commentators will take the opportunity to get on the side of the truth.
There’s a quite a few out there who need to do so and “deniers” will find it hard to get media work once the FTT skewers SDM & RFC(IAPL) & proving the internet bampots to be right.
HirsutePursuit says:
September 12, 2012 at 14:26
When Rover Group went into administration the administrators sold the brand names to a Chinese company. SAIC are the current owners of the MG brand. Rover Group are the previous owners of the MG brand.
——–
That made me think. I wondered to myself whether the MG6 is being touted with any kind of heritage unrelated to the current company?
Sure enough:
http://mg.co.uk/about-mg/history-heritage/
It looks pretty much like the new brand owners claim the entire history of the MG marque – including a title win at the 1933 Mille Miglia.
I can say, without even being a lawyer, but with absolute certainty, that being the director of a company which continues to trade while you know it is insolvent, is a criminal offence. A very hard one to prove, though, but some of the meanderings of ex RFC directors are straying into the area of confession- why don’t these people just say nothing? Maybe they are counting on their “circle and square” references to buy them immunity from prosecution? It will be interesting to see how that one works out.
By the way, Lord Hodge,if you are reading this, any chance of RFC being liquidated any time soon? If I give someone a 3 week deadline, I look to deal with their report in that timescale or less. Or is that just me? Yes, I know the courts are busy. So why ask for a report at all? A bit of time needed by Mr Green/Whyte to let the old switcheroo take place? Surely not. Or is that just me again?
The more I see of this, the more cynical I get, this is just the embodiment of everything I saw that was rotten in public life in the West of Scotland 50 years ago. AJ pulls on the apron and makes a direct appeal to the brothers. And we are all supposed to be deaf daft and dumb. Aye right, OK, no questions asked. What a sink of corruption. Absolutely nothing has changed in 50 years. Let’s not mention the masons, though- somebody might get offended. Oh, and it’s off topic. Well sorry, it’s not off topic, it’s absolutely at the heart of all this. TDs gratefully accepted.
Docs available for Hillsborough report
http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/hc1213/hc05/0581/0581.pdf
campsiejoe says:
September 12, 2012 at 14:54
Goosy @ 14:43
from 26 Ocotber 2009
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/spl/rangers/exclusive-the-board-v-the-bank-rangers-entire-first-team-squad-face-being-sold-to-the-highest-bidder-1.928477
Exclusive: The Board v The Bank – Rangers’ entire first-team squad face being sold to the highest bidder – Darryl Broadfoot
Rangers’ entire first-team squad will be systematically sold and replaced internally from next season, with the consequent dismantling of the coaching staff, if the club’s senior management do not emerge victorious from a cataclysmic behind-the-scenes struggle with Lloyds Banking Group.
The Herald can today reveal the full extent of the internal politics that have pitted the guardians of the club’s future against the financial institution that has now assumed day-to-day control over the crippling financial affairs in an effort to recoup their £30m.
Alastair Johnston, the new chairman, Martin Bain, the chief executive, and the rest of the Rangers board are steadfastly resistant to the brutal worst-case scenario outlined by the bank at the last board meeting. Unless a new owner can be found imminently — and Dave King, the South Africa-based businessman, has re-entered negotiations to assume control — the bank will insist on administering drastic surgery to the ailing club at the end of the season. Put simply, every first-team asset would be sold to the highest bidder and no contracts sanctioned unless King, or other potential investors, can agree a price with Lloyds and stave off the threat of administration.
Sources at Ibrox have confirmed that only a takeover within the next six months will prevent a mass exodus. Walter Smith, whose contract expires in January, will steadfastly refuse to preside over such a debilitating cull, which would include the transfers of such established pillars as Madjid Bougherra, Allan McGregor, Pedro Mendes and Steven Davis.
Ally McCoist and Kenny McDowall, widely regarded as favourites to succeed the 61-year-old when he leaves — which could occur as soon as a new owner is ensconced — have serious misgivings about staying on in such extreme circumstances. It would mean appointing a new and inevitably cost-effective coaching team on the proviso there would be no budget for transfer fees or significant Bosman salaries.
Smith took the extraordinary decision to put his head above the parapet after Saturday’s 1-1 draw against Hibernian at Ibrox to reveal the extent of bank interference since Sir David Murray was instructed to stand down as chairman and effectively waive the value of his shareholding.
It was a bold strategy, but one the 61-year-old was prepared to take to bring transparency amid the thickening fog of uncertainty engulfing the stricken club.
He has wearied of the internal politics at play but will continue to defend the honour and integrity of the club he has served twice as manager. The board have continually railed against the bank’s budgeting policy for next season onwards, which — to the astonishment of the Ibrox hierarchy — was inclusive of sustained revenue from European football and a continuation of current season-ticket uptake.
It was pointed out that, with a weakened team and increasingly complex qualification path, participation in the Champions League would be improbable and, consequently, supporters would be disinclined to watch a watered-down team.
Bain, in particular, has fought against a devastating dilution of the club’s value and credibility, which is why the club preserved Champions League ticket prices in the midst of a recession.
Last night, one source confirmed the severity of Rangers’ plight. “Effectively, if the bank’s plan is implemented in full, there will be no money available for players in the next transfer window, in the summer or, frankly, for the foreseeable future,” he said. “Anybody sold in these windows would immediately be replaced by inexperienced players from the youth team.
“Moving forward, no contracts that are due to expire will be renewed and no money would be available for strengthening.”
Rangers’ board were stunned by Lloyds’ thinly disguised threat to place Rangers in administration unless they signed up to a radical overhaul that will be overseen by Donald Muir. The appointment of the turnaround specialist, or company doctor, as a non-executive director signalled the most significant decision taken yet by the bank. While there is an understanding of his new remit at Rangers, there is also a tacit unwillingness to endorse it.
Lloyds, which is about to embark on a £23bn fund-raising project to prevent the government lifting its stake from 43% to 60%, are acutely aware of the wider implications of pushing such an institution towards administration.
None the less, they have intensified their bid to reclaim their £30m borrowed by Rangers and rectify the wider financial concerns affecting Murray International.
Their squeeze on Rangers began last January, when a mandate was submitted to prominent agents alerting clubs to the availability of all first-team players.
In the end, only a £3m bid from Birmingham City for Kris Boyd was forthcoming and, ultimately, rejected by the player.
In March, the bank conducted an audit of Rangers’ accounts, undertaken by PricewaterhouseCoopers, that enforced the £1m sale of Barry Ferguson and the removal of 10 fringe players from the wage bill.
This, according to many within the club, is merely the tip of the iceberg. It is understood there was a reluctance to sanction another one-year, pay-as-you-play contract for David Weir and, indeed, The Herald can reveal the captain actually started the season without having signed a contract.
smartie1947 says:
September 12, 2012 at 14:54
————————————
The FTT(tax) is entirely independent and will issue it’s ruling when it issues it’s ruling. If anyone knows when that is going to be announced it is because it has already ruled and the announcement is being held back.
That is standard procedure, as I understand it the appelant and respondent are told the result a week before it goes into the public domain.
Bearing in mind that this was a tribunal held in private. So we cannot predict just how much information will actually go into the public domain when it actually happens. It could be a lot, it could be a little, I suppose in theory it could be nothing.
Predictions on when it is going to rule are best taken with a large pinch of salt. When it is likely to be announced is a different matter.
Unless of course the source is one of the panel members or someone very close to them.
WOTTPI says:
September 12, 2012 at 15:31
0 0 Rate This
campsiejoe says:
September 12, 2012 at 14:54
Goosy @ 14:43
from 26 Ocotber 2009
This, according to many within the club, is merely the tip of the iceberg. It is understood there was a reluctance to sanction another one-year, pay-as-you-play contract for David Weir and, indeed, The Herald can reveal the captain actually started the season without having signed a contract.
———————————-
Does this mean he was’nt registered?
Chris McLaughlin @BBCchrismclaug
commission set up to investigate allegations of dual contracts at #Rangers throw out clubs protest over legal authority. Probe will continue
Expand
Reply Retweet Favorite
“In the end, only a £3m bid from Birmingham City for Kris Boyd was forthcoming and, ultimately, rejected by the player.”
well, at least alex can say he tried to help. would’ve been a bargain too.
Angus says:
September 12, 2012 at 14:57
0 2 Rate This
HirsutePursuit says:
September 12, 2012 at 14:26
When Rover Group went into administration the administrators sold the brand names to a Chinese company. SAIC are the current owners of the MG brand. Rover Group are the previous owners of the MG brand.
——–
That made me think. I wondered to myself whether the MG6 is being touted with any kind of heritage unrelated to the current company?
Sure enough:
http://mg.co.uk/about-mg/history-heritage/
It looks pretty much like the new brand owners claim the entire history of the MG marque – including a title win at the 1933 Mille Miglia.
=========================================
I think they list the history of the brand – but they also are clear that they are not the original company. The are honest in saying that they simply purchased the brand.
jockybhoy says:
September 12, 2012 at 14:50
14 0 Rate This
longtimelurker says: September 12, 2012 at 12:21
5 1 i Rate This
I bought 500 shares at Fergus McCann’s divestment, cost me £1500 and is the single worst investment/purchase I have ever made.
You kept Celtic alive and your shares are still owrht something -(more than a Rangers shareholder can say). Knowing you kept the club formed in 1888 alive and formed the foundtation for it’s future success is a better return than my investments have made…
******************************************************************************************************************
Ehr, no. This was the third share issue that I bought into the one that enabled FMC to walk away with £34million.
I have the word MUG tattooed on my forehead.
Andy Park @radioandypark
SPL independent commission have set the date for a hearing into Rangers alleged dual contracts. The hearing will commence on Tues 13th Nov.
Expand
Reply Retweet Favorite
Roland Brown says:
September 12, 2012 at 15:51
0 0 i Rate This
Andy Park @radioandypark
SPL independent commission have set the date for a hearing into Rangers alleged dual contracts. The hearing will commence on Tues 13th Nov.
Expand
Reply Retweet Favorite
=============================
That actually made me LOL.
I’ve just received my copy of Downfall from Amazon.
There are 293 paragraphs and 302 pages. Who wrote this, a five year old? 🙂
Why don’t they drag it out a bit more! This is all a bit ‘sudden’ 🙂
An analysis of Mad Dog Johnston latest public utterances.
http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/?p=10353
Chris McLaughlin @BBCchrismclaug
#Rangers hearing to commence on 13th November and last until 21st November. Oldco and newcomer invited invited to appear.
How many apologies for cover ups by previous governements must this guy make, first Sunday Bloody Sunday, now Hillsborough. For years people said Thatcher had blood on her hands, it is proven time after time, and it will all cover up by the same MSM we are still reporting on.
Shamefull, government, shamefull press.
HirsutePursuit says:
I think they list the history of the brand – but they also are clear that they are not the original company. The are honest in saying that they simply purchased the brand.
——–
There lies the rub. They’re clear they’re not the original company. But it’s by no means clear that they think the “brand” does not own the history.
“A few years later, in 1924, he designed the 14/28 Super Sports model, the first true MG, and the car that premiered the octagonal logo which has journeyed with us ever since.”
“Us”, of course, could refer to all of us, not just the company, or the “entity” (MG).
However, their “Philosophy” page makes things a little clearer …
“We’ve been putting the fun into driving for over 85 years and the MG6 shows that we’ve lost none of that ability to produce cars where performance and price make you smile in equal measure.”
Seems pretty clear cut to me. They bought the brand. They claim, and actively use as a selling point, the history of the little octagonal badge.
I wish you hadn’t mentioned MGs in the first place. Actually, we have one ourselves – a ZT. But I don’t think of it as a “real” MG myself. 🙂
Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
September 12, 2012 at 08:01
‘..The Board minutes alone will make for very interesting reading..’
—————–
So they should, indeed, but many an item discussed at Board meetings is not minuted!
Slippery, devious, and powerful Chairmen dealing with compromised, complicit , greedy and gutless board members can make sure of that.
Only D&P at the moment have access to and control of the former club’s paper-work.
Their unwillingness to appear before the SPL Commission raises in my mind a whole lot of questions about the precise nature of the relationship between them and CG.
Why would an independent ‘court appointed’ Administrator, owing no loyalty either to the defunct business or to the business-man who bought the assets of the defunct business, care a tuppenny toss about the alleged shenanigans of the dead business or the rantings of the owner of the asets?
Most unprofessional.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Could they just be protecting the remaining “assets” of RFC(IA) by not assisting a process they know will lead to more fines or spending more money on lawyers defending a foregone conclusion?
Independent Commission Preliminary Hearing
The Commission has considered all the preliminary issues raised in the list submitted by Newco and points raised in letters from solicitors acting for Newco and for Oldco. It has decided:
1. The Commission will proceed with its inquiry in the terms of the Notice of Commission and will now set a date for a hearing and give directions.
2. Oldco and Rangers FC, who are named in the Issues contained in the Notice of Commission and alleged to have been in breach of SPL rules, will continue to have the right to appear and be represented at all hearings of the Commission and to make such submissions as they think fit.
3. Newco, as the current owner and operator of Rangers FC, although not alleged by the SPL to have committed any breach of SPL Rules, will also have the right to appear and be represented at all hearings of the Commission and to make such submissions as it thinks fit.
4. Written reasons for this decision will be made available in due course.
Further to the decision made today the Commission make the following procedural orders:
1. We set a date for a hearing to commence on Tuesday 13 November 2012 with continuations from day to day as may be required until Friday 16 November 2012. We will also allocate Tuesday 20 and Wednesday 21 November 2012 as additional dates should any further continuation be required.
2. We direct that the solicitors for The Scottish Premier League Limited lodge any documents, additional to those already lodged, together with an outline argument and a list of witnesses by 4 pm on Friday 19 October 2012.
3. We direct that Oldco, Newco or any other person claiming an interest and wishing to appear and be represented at the hearing give intimation to that effect and lodge any documents together with an outline argument and a list of witnesses, all by 4 pm on Thursday 1 November 2012.
4. We direct that intimation of the aforesaid decision and of these directions be made to the solicitors for Oldco and Newco.
No further comment will be made.
http://www.scotprem.com/content/defa…2&newsid=11698
Wonder who will be the PM when the truth comes out about ………rfc(iastbil) sevco, green, whyte, sdm etc etc etc………!!!!
sorry, should be
http://www.scotprem.com/content/default.asp?page=s2&newsid=11698
jammy dodger says:
September 12, 2012 at 15:11
31 2 i Rate This
I can say, without even being a lawyer, but with absolute certainty, that being the director of a company which continues to trade while you know it is insolvent, is a criminal offence. A very hard one to prove, though
==========================================================================
Jammy Dodger…thank you for your most timeous post…I was about to post a general comment re the “trading whilst insolvent” position when I read your post.
I have just commenced reading PMG’s book and his first full chapter (Part 1: finance) mentions this state of insolvency on quite a few occasions.
It is indeed a particularly difficult concept/position to prove, that a director or directors, continued to trade, knowing full well that they had no assets to cover liabilities, and that nothing was “on the horizon” to indicate otherwise.
I cannot recall a case in my short life where a material case was taken to court and “trading whilst insolvent”, as I remember a criminal charge (?), was proved.
Also, bearing in mind the current contraints of all government departments, I cannot see any likelihood of such a case being brought before the courts, and I am saddened by that.
In the meantime, it merely appears to be a “legal concept” that we “internet bampots” can flag up, albeit retrospectively, but with little prospect of any corrective action being taken.
Finally…I would dearly love to be proven to be totally wrong in this area!
ELC says:
September 12, 2012 at 16:00
Chris McLaughlin @BBCchrismclaug
#Rangers hearing to commence on 13th November and last until 21st November. Oldco and newcomer invited invited to appear.
======================================================
So the prima facia eveidence announced on the 18th June will be heard on the 13th November, where a liquidated club and another clubs representatives will be asked to attend, how strange.!
I imagine that the liquidators, BDO, will be in situ by then and will be unable to answer any questions regarding any of this, which they won’t be able to do, or will come as a creditor cost.
The newcomer meanwhile will state they have never been members of the SPL and no nothing of the working or rules of the SPL. None of the directors of this club were involved in the old club either, well excpet CG anyway.
Massive cover up has started. This will be over a year since Mark Daly aired his documentary on Rangers, shocking.
WOTTPI says:
September 12, 2012 at 11:22
14 0 i Rate This
Re Downfall and Amazon.
Is it not just the case that the publishers only did a limited print run and Amazon have already sent out their quota as provided by their suppliers..
Afterall it is not just fans of non Govan teams that are buying it up.
Circa 32 growling bears have apparently bought and read the book and managed to write a review.
Interesting to note that the reviews to date are polar opposites (5 star -12 or 1 star -32 and nothing in between).
Even the books on the Israel/Palestine conflict have a range of reviews.
Only in Scotland!!!
=======================================================================
WOTTPI….I have just had my copy delivered to my local bookshop in NE London/Essex borders and no conspiracy theories offered by the owner re distribution problems.
However, I did explain to her re the “keeping it under the shelf” mentality in Glasgow, and being a Scots lass who studied at Strathclyde University, she gave me an all too-knowing look/shrug of the shoulders….!
Need I say more…?
So the commision think the club and the company are 2 distinct entities, Oldco, Newco are the comanies, Rangers FC are the club.
Does the SPL registration pertain to clubs or companies??
I thought all players were registered with the club, therefore the company has nothing to do with this.
They are protecting the rights here of NEWCO brand Rangers, shambles.
2. Oldco and Rangers FC, who are named in the Issues contained in the Notice of Commission and alleged to have been in breach of SPL rules, will continue to have the right to appear and be represented at all hearings of the Commission and to make such submissions as they think fit.
3. Newco, as the current owner and operator of Rangers FC,
“Oldco and Rangers FC…..”
“Newco, as current owner and operator of Rangers FC….”
Neil, Neil, Neil………….did D&P write that for you?
The con is on!……I have no financial or legal training whatsoever but know this stinks to high heavens ……… Meanwhile CO still in situ apparently doing no work but still being paid?????
smallteaser says:
September 12, 2012 at 10:22
13 1 i
Rate This
Essex beancounter says:
September 12, 2012 at 09:04
http://www.perrymarshall.com/articles/religion/godels-incompleteness-theorem/
=========================================================================
Smallteaser…thank you…and here is me thinking that when I tried to teach double entry bookeeping to solicitors, albeit in Englandshire, my head used to hurt, alleviated only by many and rapid infusions of life restoring red wine!
I suggest no more OT excursions lest we be barred by the Mods!
Brenda says:
September 12, 2012 at 16:11
1
0
Rate This
Wonder who will be the PM when the truth comes out about ………rfc(iastbil) sevco, green, whyte, sdm etc etc etc………!!!!
===========================================================
My bet is Romeo Beckham or Lord Hodge’s grandson !
paul martin says:
“Oldco and Rangers FC…..”
“Newco, as current owner and operator of Rangers FC….”
Neil, Neil, Neil………….did D&P write that for you?
______________________________________________________
Indeed.
So they double down on the fiction that there is an etheral body called Rangers that can be transferred between companies. A body that has no legal standing whatsoever, beacuse it doesn’t exist!
We would be suffering none of this Sevco nonsense, if the SFA, SPL and SFL had declared right from the start that Rangers were dead when they go into liquidation, and that Sevco were a NEW CLUB!
Still, despite all the threats, intimidation and arrogance spewed forth by the Sevconians, the weasels in the SPL and SFA won’t tell the truth and finally slay the beast. They will suffer any indignity to support the very monster that publically proclaims it’s hate and disdain for them! Stockholm Syndrome multipled.
And thanks to them I will never put another penny into Scottish football. I bought some Raith Rovers merchandise to thank them and Turnbull Hutton on their stance, but that’s it. I am sad to say my SPL club Hibs, and their Chairman Rod Petrie are fully complicit in supporting this scam, so they have lost my support. Rod seems to see supporting Sevco as more of a priority in fixing Hibs problems so why should I care?
I really, really hope Green follows through on his court threast bluster. Let’s see him try to prove “rangers” exists as a separate body when under sworn oath and forensic legal examination. Bring it on.
Essex beancounter says: NE London/EssexBorders.
I live in Wanstead. You near there?
Angus says:
September 12, 2012 at 16:07
0 0 Rate This
HirsutePursuit says:
I think they list the history of the brand – but they also are clear that they are not the original company. The are honest in saying that they simply purchased the brand.
——–
There lies the rub. They’re clear they’re not the original company. But it’s by no means clear that they think the “brand” does not own the history.
“A few years later, in 1924, he designed the 14/28 Super Sports model, the first true MG, and the car that premiered the octagonal logo which has journeyed with us ever since.”
“Us”, of course, could refer to all of us, not just the company, or the “entity” (MG).
However, their “Philosophy” page makes things a little clearer …
“We’ve been putting the fun into driving for over 85 years and the MG6 shows that we’ve lost none of that ability to produce cars where performance and price make you smile in equal measure.”
Seems pretty clear cut to me. They bought the brand. They claim, and actively use as a selling point, the history of the little octagonal badge.
I wish you hadn’t mentioned MGs in the first place. Actually, we have one ourselves – a ZT. But I don’t think of it as a “real” MG myself.
===================================
Brand identity is all about perceptions – the Rangers brand has a history and Sevco want their customers to believe that they are part of that history. I cannot fault the logic and his motives in doing so.
Mr Green wants his customers to believe that their club’s history continues with his new company in the same way that SAIC suggest that their kit-car MG’s are evolved from the cars last manufactured in Britain by Rover Group. Yes, SAIC do use the word “we” and “us” when referring back to the history of the previous company; but they also acknowledge that it was only the brand that was purchased. They make no claim to purchasing the original company.
If Charlie simply swapped the word “club” with “brand” many more of his statements would make sense.
Using the word “club”, when he should be saying “brand” is arrant nonsense in literal terms; but, for the brand identity purposes of Sevco, he is saying exactly what he wants to say to his customers.
ongtimelurker says:
September 12, 2012 at 15:50
Fergus said before he even took over that his aim was to invest in the club to save it, work to a five year plan to put it on a sound commercial footing and then leave having made a profit for his efforts.
Unlike many others he did everything he said he would – good luck to him I say
….and I too have some “worthless” shares but don’t regret a penny.
jockybhoy says:
September 12, 2012 at 16:47
0 0 i
Rate This
Essex beancounter says: NE London/EssexBorders.
I live in Wanstead. You near there?
=========================================================================
Yup….know The George only too well….my office is just up the road.. a mile or so towards Epping…got to be discrete or ICAS will “rumble” me…!
Just because you’re paranoid…… says:
September 12, 2012 at 16:55
0 0 Rate This
longtimelurker says:
****************************************************************************************************************
I know what Fergus said mate and I knew that when i bought some of his shares and I’m still a MUG for buying them because not one brown penny went to Celtic but I knew what I was doing and I have regretted it ever since.
Getting a bit too close now Davie boy.
http://news.sky.com/story/984290/exclusive-ex-hbos-exec-gets-huge-fine-and-ban
Surrender No Johnston states
” “the SFA wrote to us asking for more details about the public speculation concerning our financial and tax situation. The latter obviously referenced the impact of the EBT schemes as creating a potential taxation liability.”
“The club responded accordingly and provided details, as it had done in previous years, by declaring player salaries, bonuses, benefits, etc., but also payments made to a Remuneration Trust. The SFA compliance officers must have known, both from the description and context of the reports, that such expenditures had some connection to player compensation.”
They declared salaries, bonus’s, benefits etc. – I take it these matched up to what was in the contract submitted to the SFA/SPL?
Also, payments made to a remuneration trust – did you state who these payments were for and were they included in the amounts stated in the players contracts? Or were you simply saying RFC made payments into a trust and that it was those payments that were subject to HMRC’s tax investigation – a separate issue from player registrations and related to the HMRC case.
Why did the SFA contact you? The SFA wanted clarification that there were no outstanding tax issues. They weren’t looking at player registration issues at that time of “public speculation” Once again, RFC seem to want to link the 2 things together when they are not actually related. The “non disclosed payments” issue followed long after they contacted the club in 2010
However, he states “The SFA compliance officers must have known, both from the description and context of the reports, that such expenditures had some connection to player compensation.”
so, the EBT’s WERE used for player compensation….they MUST have known? So, case closed for HMRC, AJ has just confirmed that the EBT contributions WERE for player compensation – so, that’ll be £54M then – including interest and penalties please.
Oh but wait, if players were paid through EBT’s – something they are not a suitable vehicle for – then even if you did include every single penny in the players contracts lodged with the SFA/SPL, then you have failed to pay all social taxes due….So you should never had had a license to participate in UEFA competitions – so, i reckon that is about 5 years worth of UEFA money you owe Celtic (who were second) £75M should cover it please
Oh sorry, whats that, you didn’t include those amounts paid via an ebt in the contracts lodged with the SFA, as you’d have had to pay tax on them? OK, well then the players were illegally registered, so that’ll be at least 5 titles, £75M in compo to celtic (not to mention the SPL prize money and compo to teams relegated) and, as it WAS wages, HMRC will have their £54M please
THANKS FOR CLEARING THAT UP AJ.
Blindsummit / Paul Martin says
It does look that way, however it might also be that they are differentiating between the various owners/operators of ‘Rangers FC’ in order to ensure that it is ‘Rangers FC’ i.e. the club that is judged. Would this be in keeping with UEFA / FIFA definitions?
There will be differences in liability for the various individuals / controlling minds that operated the club, and focusing on one of these regimes to the exclusion on another might not catch all the various shenanigans that may exist or have existed over time. Similarly lumping the various regimes together would also make it more difficult to assign any responsibility or blame, and make any appedal or other recourse more likely.
I’m more comfortable with this, assuming I’m on the right track.
The date set might have also been chosen to allow time for them to see the results of the FTT if it is indeed out in October. I’m sure internet bampots everywherre will be able to highlight any pertinent issues that might be in there and try to get them in the public domain before the panel meet.
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
September 12, 2012 at 17:14
2 0 i Rate This
Surrender No Johnston states
” “the SFA wrote to us asking for more details about the public speculation concerning our financial and tax situation. The latter obviously referenced the impact of the EBT schemes as creating a potential taxation liability.”
“The club responded accordingly and provided details, as it had done in previous years, by declaring player salaries, bonuses, benefits, etc., but also payments made to a Remuneration Trust. The SFA compliance officers must have known, both from the description and context of the reports, that such expenditures had some connection to player compensation.”
They declared salaries, bonus’s, benefits etc. – I take it these matched up to what was in the contract submitted to the SFA/SPL?
Also, payments made to a remuneration trust – did you state who these payments were for and were they included in the amounts stated in the players contracts? Or were you simply saying RFC made payments into a trust and that it was those payments that were subject to HMRC’s tax investigation – a separate issue from player registrations and related to the HMRC case.
Why did the SFA contact you? The SFA wanted clarification that there were no outstanding tax issues. They weren’t looking at player registration issues at that time of “public speculation” Once again, RFC seem to want to link the 2 things together when they are not actually related. The “non disclosed payments” issue followed long after they contacted the club in 2010
However, he states “The SFA compliance officers must have known, both from the description and context of the reports, that such expenditures had some connection to player compensation.”
so, the EBT’s WERE used for player compensation….they MUST have known? So, case closed for HMRC, AJ has just confirmed that the EBT contributions WERE for player compensation – so, that’ll be £54M then – including interest and penalties please.
Oh but wait, if players were paid through EBT’s – something they are not a suitable vehicle for – then even if you did include every single penny in the players contracts lodged with the SFA/SPL, then you have failed to pay all social taxes due….So you should never had had a license to participate in UEFA competitions – so, i reckon that is about 5 years worth of UEFA money you owe Celtic (who were second) £75M should cover it please
Oh sorry, whats that, you didn’t include those amounts paid via an ebt in the contracts lodged with the SFA, as you’d have had to pay tax on them? OK, well then the players were illegally registered, so that’ll be at least 5 titles, £75M in compo to celtic (not to mention the SPL prize money and compo to teams relegated) and, as it WAS wages, HMRC will have their £54M please
THANKS FOR CLEARING THAT UP AJ.
====================================================================
NTHMC….wickedly brilliant.
Not even Ian Hislop at Private Eye, mooted by some on this site as someone to do some more exposure bon this whole sordid affair, could have exceeded your caustic comments…superb piece!
Chris McLaughlin @BBCchrismclaug
#SPL have investigated claims that #Celtic may have had side contract with Juninho but say there is no case to answer.
Expand
Reply Retweet Favorite
Chris McLaughlin @BBCchrismclaug
In light of Charles Green’s comments about other club’s using EBT’s, #SPL are asking for anyone with proof to come forward.
Expand
Reply Retweet Favorite
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
September 12, 2012 at 17:14
Thats the point isn’t it.
At no time in this sorry tale have I ever heard anything eminating from Ibrox that leads me to believe they are not guility of the two charges 1) Mismanagement of the EBT scheme and 2) Improper player registration.
This is further backed up by the evidence provided by RTC and Mark Daly.
At the very least they will be found out on one of the two issues and most likely will be nabbed for both.
More a Cuckfield Bhoy myself, George went downhill when it got Wetherspooned!
what about an investigation into the NEWCO players being wrongly registered?
players being temporary registered – or rather – temporary membership of SFA !?
no such accredited registration status going by the rules, so by definition – they were wrongly registered.
if there is a temporary status…we could have a list of maybe 4 clubs, who could have 3months membership on a rotation basis, allowing sevco to play glamour friendlies when they’re on a rotation break ?
Message from the now failed St.Mirren buy out bid.
Back to the drawing board….now, who wants to buy an SPL team
10000Hours Statement
On behalf of the 1000+ members of 10000hours we would like to express our disappointment that we have been unable to conclude the deal to purchase the majority shareholding in St Mirren Football Club for its fans.
We made the very best sustainable and deliverable offer we could, based on the substantial backing we received from our members.
That offer was for £1.25 million, to be paid over a 3 year period.
We would like to make it clear that none of our major backers had any doubts about the concept.
While it is now time to end our bid for the controlling interest in our football club, our formal offer remains open indefinitely should the selling consortium have a change of heart.
We wish the club every success both on and off the park and again would like to thank everyone who backed the bid for their tremendous support.
Roland Brown on September 12, 2012 at 17:28
Assuming that there is no further evidence of EBT use – will the SFA do a fit and propper person test on CG.
Its not sporting to make such accusations esp if they are totally unfounded.
Roland Brown says:
September 12, 2012 at 17:28
Chris McLaughlin @BBCchrismclaug
In light of Charles Green’s comments about other club’s using EBT’s, #SPL are asking for anyone with proof to come forward.
______________________________________________________________________
Ah Ha, finally a little bit of gumption shown by the SPL.
The only person with this apparent information is Mr Charles. However he has dismissed the SPL as being a Mickey Mouse organisation.
If he is a honest and open as he claimed in his bbc radio interview “Honesty is the best policy” then surely he will come forward, justify his claims and provide the authorities with the necessary information.
If he doesn’t trust the SPL then he has FIFA, UEFA, SFA and SFL to whom he can pass on this important information.
Finally someone is saying to Charlie Boy “Put up or Shut Up”
PS
Given the none too subtle SPL challenge to Mr Charles and the Roger Mitchell piece in the Herald are there signs that the worm is finally summoning up enough courage to turn?
I really really hope so 🙂 but I doubt it 🙁