Daft and Dafter
It gets dafter and dafter. It is just over a year since the ridiculous and embarrassing – but failed – attempts by those in charge of Scottish Football to blackmail the SFL clubs and force them to parachute the shiny new Rangers into the SFL First Division.
A year where the new era of “transparency” heralded by a huge drum roll, gave way to secret agreements (which were never adhered to); panic-stricken measures to rush through change in the structure of the game without ANY delay or meaningful consultation – despite a hitherto intransigent approach to any kind of change; non-denial denials of the charge that Rangers were given a football licence without due process.
By the way, the SFA sent an official to an SPL Tribunal with a new convoluted interpretation of a rule which had been used to penalise clubs in the past, and ignored compelling evidence that one club had been economical with the truth on matters regarding banned directors when submitting their application for membership.
I could go on of course, but the incredulity bar is lowered with each ridiculous, contorted and corrupt episode, so that by the time we get to the claims made by several sources that Charles Green was in league with Craig Whyte when he bought some of the old club’s assets, we hardly blink an eye that the SFA appear content to accept the outcome of an internal inquiry ordered by the organisation most likely to be disadvantaged if the claims were true.
Whatever RTC was about, and it was about avarice, corporate malfeasance, theft of public money and the destruction of the integrity of competition in the game, we have moved on from there.
Even if the powers in charge of our game are forced to dispense proper justice in the case of both old Rangers and the new club, there appears to be little prospect that they will have done so because of a Damascene conversion in the ways of sporting integrity, fairness and Corinthianism. They will still be corrupt – just corrupt and bad at it. I am convinced that people have left the game in some numbers this season because of their disgust at the handling of the Rangers fiasco. I see no evidence at all that those people who voted with their feet last year will see a reason to change their tune this time around.
Whatever Rangers were guilty of, there is a general understanding of why they did what they did. They wanted to win – to be the best, and they pushed the envelope as far as they could before tearing the thing up altogether. What they did was 100% in their own self interest. It stinks, but at least it is logical.
What the authorities have done on the other hand is far more gobsmackingly illogical and unintuitive. They have acted in the interest of one club to the continued disadvantage of eleven others (in the case of the SPL, UEFA licences and player registration). They acted against the interests of new aspirants to senior football, and in concert with the interest of just one when they shoehorned Sevco (that’s what they were called then) into the SFL Third Division. I am sure they did that in the belief that a full season of no football at Ibrox would probably kill forever the cash cow that Green and his cohorts were fattening up for slaughter.
Despite the punishment that was accepted by Sevco (the transfer embargo), the SFA have stood by whilst the spirit of that sanction (although admittedly not the letter) was ripped up in their (still silent and impassive) faces as the MSM spun a market day frenzy of transfer activity by a club who were ostensibly proscribed from participating in that market.
Of course there are those who do not want to believe that their club, one of the forty-one good guys, is complicit in this nonsense – and yet ALL of our clubs ARE the SFA or the SPFL. Despite this catalogue of shameful inaction, sabotage and double-dealing, not one voice of dissent emanating from any of our clubs has been heard in print or broadcast media. Instead, huge pay increases and votes of thanks to the bureaucrats who acted out the farce authored by their masters, the clubs.
Is this because they (the clubs) are in agreement with what has transpired? I find it impossible to come to any other conclusion.
There are those who argue compellingly that if clubs, especially those who have a history of rivalry with Rangers tinged with some rancour, were to speak out, the press would have a field day; that allegations of bigotry and Rangers-hating would ensue from the MSM which would wind up the otherwise reasonable chaps who support Rangers.
In my view, if the situation is thus, then we are saying that we all have to keep our thoughts to ourselves, know our place and just take what scraps we get. If fear of violent retribution is the trump card here, then the trick for success in Scottish Football is not to have the most feared football team, but the group of fans which fills others with most dread. That is the death of the game – period.
What crystallises itself for me here is this fear factor. Anonymity has been carefully protected by most of us on this blog for exactly the reasons outlined above. Our desire to remain anonymous has been strengthened by the failure of authority, jointly AND severally, to itself stand up for the sport. The key from day one has been fear. Fear and corruption, which is merely a microcosm of the life in our country.
Whether it’s the media ignoring the wrongdoings of a football club, or a corrupt political system where for £40m donation you can get yourself £400m in tax breaks, we see those with resources pissing all over us from a very prodigious height. And when we do find out about it, we are cautioned to be very afraid of taking any action. Afraid of terrorism, afraid of unemployment, afraid of the mob.
I find myself resigned to the realisation that no matter WHAT evidence is uncovered, it will make absolutely no difference to anyone unless Joe Public keeps his hands in his pockets. People in boardrooms all over the country are betting that football fans are too emotionally invested in their clubs to do so.
The cheats, the spivs and the blazers will in the short and medium term get their own way, many of them aware of the fact that they are not quite as equal as others – and yet happy to go along with that.
We all have to decide whether or not we are as content as they are.
Suspecting as I do that most of us will find that unacceptable, I think there is still a war to be won, even if the battles seem to be going against us time and again. As long as we continue to feel that sense of outrage, that sense of betrayal by the custodians of our sport, we will still be shouting from these pages.
Thanks to the generosity and commitment of our readers, the shouting is about to get louder. We have reached our funding target and we hope to start organising our Podcasts within the next few weeks. The fight goes on, but hopefully it will also have greater reach.
TSFM
Trisidium administrator
Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.
727 Comments so far
ChristyboyPosted on1:02 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Howdy, what are the chances, if they are really stuck, that the SPFhell announce that the sponsors of the the new league ( same crew ) will in some way sponsor Glasgow’s Commonwealth games. It would certainly get them out of a hole and kick the can down the road for another year. Albeit a hole they dug for themselves…..
View Comment
AuldheidPosted on1:21 pm - Jul 23, 2013
ecobhoy says:
July 23, 2013 at 10:20 am
Auldheid says:
July 23, 2013 at 3:19 am
—————————————————
I think there are a few things we have to consider and learn about the Rangers Discounted Option Scheme to make any informed opinion on whether payments under it were ‘irregular’ or not.
We don’t know if it was designed by the accountants who created the DOS model which was sold to AAM. Always remember the huge tax reduction industry is out there always seeking loopholes and ways of reducing tax. So when someone comes up with a scheme that works then plenty of imitators jump on the bandwagon and market their own-brand alternatives which usually have differences from the original to save any pesky copyright infringements.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
True but Rangers did not argue the case with HMRC that the AAM decision by an FTT (and Later UTT) set a precedent applicable to Rangers and at no point subsequently did Rangers appeal the tax due arising from the use of DOS.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I have also now had the chance to skim through the FTTT and UTT Decisions on the AAM DOS and as I suspected there is no mention or connection with Rangers.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
See above. It was HMRC who made the connection between Rangers use of DOS and AAM
+++++++++++++++++++++++
It also appears to me that certain bits of the complex AAM DOS blueprint provided by the scheme’s accountant ‘architects’ weren’t followed which obviously left trapdoors for HMRC to attack the scheme. But it has to be remembered that HMRC were unable to act against companies using DOS until tax legislation was changed in 2003 after the schemes had been running for 3/4 years.
So, all in all, I really don’t think we have enough info to extrapolate any finding from the AAM DOS to the Rangers DOS. Wrt to the AAM DOS there doesn’t appear to be any side letter mechanism as the scheme was structured and operated differently from EBTs.
This virtually guarantees the Rangers DOS involving De Boer, Moor and Flo didn’t have side letters so Rangers would be telling the truth if they denied their existence IMO and by extension they couldn’t have been hidden from the SFA if they didn’t exist. However LNS factored in the Rangers DOS payments and found Rangers guilty of failing to disclose them and also the EBT payments. What LNS didn’t know was that The Rangers DOS was a totally different scheme from the Rangers EBT scheme.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No there are side letters, they are crucial to the advice given to Rangers to settle on DOS. Rangers themselves distinguished what we simply call EBTS under MGMLRT from the DOS EBTS under Rangers. Both were EBTS but with different constructs and Rangers use of DOS was not illegal because of later law changes but because of how they implemented the DOS with side letters.
I think we should call a halt at this point as we are working from different information bases and the point in any case might well sink or rise to prominence in respect of the MGMLRT EBTs if UTT give HMRC the nod. I suggest we let history decide ecobhoy and spend no more time on the issue.
View Comment
vivitronPosted on1:27 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Regarding sponsorship of SPFL…
I was at a BT event a couple of weeks ago and there was an unofficial hint from a BT representative that they would be involved in some form of sponsorship of Scottish Football and that an announcement was imminent.
Nothing more than that…
View Comment
briggsbhoyPosted on1:34 pm - Jul 23, 2013
The latest from Charlotte and Mr Irvine
http://i.imgur.com/SAI7sh9.jpg
2. http://i.imgur.com/ctinyTG.jpg
I’m now firmly of the opinion that his nickname should be Jackass
View Comment
Angus1983Posted on1:37 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Bill – cheers. 🙂
However, I think I’ll take a wee holiday again. I’d hoped that it was no longer the case that the first requirement of a post concerning anything to do with Rangers was that it is anti-Rangers.
You’ll note that I suggested that a Sun journalist (who are generally one tit short of an udder anyway) may have made a mistake resulting in a quickly-rectified situation which many posters fell over themselves to take offence at.
This apparently means that I represent Media House and cannot see the institutional bias against Celtic.
I would suggest to this blog that the wider footballing fraternity will not take it seriously until it is able to accept open, reasoned discussion and not leap either to the defence of Celtic [] or rubbish anyone who suggests Rangers may have done something not 100% evil.
View Comment
ianagainPosted on2:00 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Can anyone explain to me, given the now notorious notion of the never ending unexpirable everlasting player registration that exists for all Pretendygers players why James McFadden of all people had to play for the ‘Well against Newcastle as “Trialist 2” ?? ❗
View Comment
Bill1903Posted on2:03 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Angus1983 says:
Bill – cheers. 🙂
However, I think I’ll take a wee holiday again. I’d hoped that it was no longer the case that the first requirement of a post concerning anything to do with Rangers was that it is anti-Rangers.
You’ll note that I suggested that a Sun journalist (who are generally one tit short of an udder anyway) may have made a mistake resulting in a quickly-rectified situation which many posters fell over themselves to take offence at.
This apparently means that I represent Media House and cannot see the institutional bias against Celtic.
I would suggest to this blog that the wider footballing fraternity will not take it seriously until it is able to accept open, reasoned discussion and not leap either to the defence of Celtic or rubbish anyone who suggests Rangers may have done something not 100% evil.
—————————————————————————————————————-
There are still a few on here who prefer a more ‘balanced’ opinion than the ‘Celtic minded’ holier than thou attitude.
There are stil some great posters on here even if you have to occasionally 🙄 when they are wallowing in self praise.
i reckon you were on Rangers media that often youve turned to the darker side and are on your way to a sash bash in Sheffield tomorrow night!
Keep giving your pennyworth min 😉
yakutsukiPosted on2:04 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Angus1983 says:
July 23, 2013 at 1:37 pm
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Angus, is there just the slightest, remotest possibility that you might be the one ‘out of step’ here?
Please bear in mind a wee gem fae ma auld granny. “If you go through life sowing thorns, don’t expect to reap roses!!!”
Hope you enjoy your break.
View Comment
smartie1947Posted on2:23 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Two football-related quips I liked today. Apologies if already posted.
a) I see that the Sevco bus has gone – but they are still allowed to retain it’s 140-mile service history.
b) News Flash. John Terry appears on the steps of the hospital to hand over the royal baby.
View Comment
neepheidPosted on2:34 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Angus1983 says:
July 23, 2013 at 1:37 pm
8 20 Rate This
Bill – cheers. 🙂
However, I think I’ll take a wee holiday again. I’d hoped that it was no longer the case that the first requirement of a post concerning anything to do with Rangers was that it is anti-Rangers.
You’ll note that I suggested that a Sun journalist (who are generally one tit short of an udder anyway) may have made a mistake resulting in a quickly-rectified situation which many posters fell over themselves to take offence at.
++++++++++++++++
Surely the first requirement is that we get our facts right. That is fundamental.
My recollection was that as originally published, the pictures were in the Sun article without subtitles. At least one other poster has confirmed that to be the case. The pictures subsequently had subtitles added. That is clear from a screenshot linked to later ( Heggarty? a jourrnalist blog?). The pictures were later pulled completely.
You based your reply to me on the basis that the pictures had subtitles. That’s perfectly understandable, if they had subtitles when you first saw them. But surely if they were initially published without subtitles, that’s a different case? It was the complete lack of any context between the pictures and the text that annoyed me. Now maybe my memory is faulty, maybe another poster is similarly challenged, but how about establishing the facts? Or maybe you think that it makes no difference- well fair enough. But if that’s the case, just say so, instead of going off with a pet lip (one of my own major faults as a child, so my mother and aunts spent 50 years reminding me 🙁 )
View Comment
SunincapricornPosted on2:52 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Auldheid : 22 July, 2013 @4:29pm.
Appreciate you taking the time to reply. Thanks.
You are correct in assuming that i want nothing more than to see the true facts emerge in their entirety.
Unfortunately it would appear by the canvas being so illustratively painted by various contributors to this site and the former RTC blog that this desire seems destined to be met with eventual dissapointment and eternal resentment.
This would no doubt lead the majority arrriving at the devastaing conclusion that any of us will ever be able to move on.
Having said that, personally i sincreley hope being in agreement with you that both of us are wrong in thinking that this could be the death knell whereby Scottish football may never recover.
The beautiful game in our wee country has historically been inter dependent on Celtic and Rangers.
The last twenty five to thirty years even more so. The ever increasing demand for and affiliation to sponsorship and media contracts has made us all the more demanding of our club and it’s chairmen. Even today the English Premiership has become the holy grail for our big two. The pursuit of higher financial reward being the only remit to allow them to compete realistically in Europe on a regular basis.
That is why i disagree with the popular belief predominantly nurtured by CFC fans that RFC is regarded as a standalone bastion of worship for the establishment. I would offer the argument that had CFC suffered the same fate as their illustrious rivals that we would not be too far away from where we are today. The governing bodies are also a slave to capitalism. The dependence on sponsorship ,TV deals and marketing is inextricably linked to the twin Gulliver’s of Glasgow.
There may be those who say losing the religious rivalry by one side of the debate dissapearing from view is a step forward.
They may or may not be correct.
Personally although i may “Find” another team i do not envisage the passion being the same. That may change over time if i were considerably younger than the fifty years i’ve stomped around this planet.
Some may say that the future generations may follow Partick Thistle and make them stronger. I don’t think this is possible. It would take too long to nurture and grow and i feel those who become “lost” will remain lost from the game for ever.
What do you think would have happened to CFC had the wee man in the bunnet not stepped in and did what he did for CFC? Would this have had any effect on the character or outlook of the Rangers fans? They may have turned their attention to Hibernian FC,if they managed to survive the event.
Again perhaps.
One thing i am fairly confident of, is that the SFA or SFL would never allow either one of it’s dominant cash cow’s dissapear over the horizon. I can make no informed opinion on the level of perceived injustice’s down the years away from the present .Perhaps others can.
The former custodians of “my club” deserve all or anything that may be coming their way in the future.
What they have done to my club is unforgivable. Putting aside for a moment all that’s transpired and affected our game as a whole, as supporter who has followed with unrelenting loyalty and trust by purchasing merchandise.. Season books and as a shareholder, i have a right to a deeply held resentment of how that loyalty and expectation was abused.
Someone on here the other day {short of time to troll through the posts} actually suggested that Rangers fans have no right to harbour resentment!
If there is a widely held perception that Rangers people outwith boardroom level..spiv world and MIH have no feelings of contempt towards those who brought this debacle to the door of Edmonstone Drive, then i am certainly not one of them. I would hope and doubt that any reasonable person would feel any different.
Going back to your post Auldheid..
“Well respected journalist”..obtained cw’s domain etc.. I have seen that title bestowed on a certain AT many times.
In regard to my previous post i would hope that it not this gentleman.
As regard to the Celtic Bloggers,that is exactly the concern i have. Can we trust all of the above to portray the full facts in an unbiased and forthright manner? All i want is the truth. What i don’t want is some mad scientist ranting, or a David Icke type character walking up and down with a board hanging round their neck saying how bad RFC are and the end of the world is nigh.
upthehoopsPosted on3:03 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Sunincapricorn says:
July 23, 2013 at 2:52 pm
Someone on here the other day {short of time to troll through the posts} actually suggested that Rangers fans have no right to harbour resentment!
================================
That was me, and I stand by my view. The only resentment I’ve witnessed is against The SFA, the SPL, HMRC, Celtic, Peter Lawwell etc which runs parallel with a breathtaking sense of entitlement. How any of that can ever be deemed as justified is beyond me. Let’s face it, if it wasn’t for fans who wanted to see justice applied Rangers would likely be in the top league outspending Celtic in the transfer market. Needless to say the taxpayers would still have been whistling in the wind for their money.
bluPosted on3:08 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Bill1903 says:
July 23, 2013 at 2:03 pm
10 0 i
===================
Angus note the TU in response to Bill and keep up the remorseless objectivity and attention to facts that we see also from others such as Ecobhoy and Auldheid in their recent discussion about the FTT/UTT – even if they didn’t agree 100%.
helpmaboabPosted on3:11 pm - Jul 23, 2013
brian53 says:
July 23, 2013 at 12:23 pm
===============================
Blu@12:59
“My observation about a few of the Celtic fans posting so far today is that it is all still about ‘Us and Them’, which is understandable because of the rivalry between the two Glasgow teams, but was something I thought both RTC and TSFM had been somewhat successful in moving on from.
Anyway, to address your post Brian, my guess is that Rangers 2012 will take some considerable time to arrive at a position that its fans think it has a right to – back competing with Celtic on level terms”
Bit confused about your post blu.Your point regarding RTC and TSFM moving on from the ‘Us and Them’ between Celtic and Rangers (Mark 2)is valid,yet the first thing you talk about is Rangers getting to the point of competing with Celtic on level terms. Perhaps you need to move on also.
View Comment
SmugasPosted on3:34 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Sunincapricorn says:
July 23, 2013 at 2:52 pm
It is the role of the SFA/SPL (as was) to recognise that (your words),”The beautiful game in our wee country has historically been inter dependent on Celtic and Rangers. The last twenty five to thirty years even more so.”
It is unequivocally NOT their job to defend it, seek to perpetuate it, nor artificially seek to recreate it when one part realises their long term dance partner has horns and a tail. That 40 other clubs appear closer to your view than mine explains to me why the game has rotted away from beneath itself.
View Comment
ecobhoyPosted on3:40 pm - Jul 23, 2013
blu says:
July 23, 2013 at 3:08 pm
Bill1903 says:
July 23, 2013 at 2:03 pm
10 0 i
===================
Angus note the TU in response to Bill and keep up the remorseless objectivity and attention to facts that we see also from others such as Ecobhoy and Auldheid in their recent discussion about the FTT/UTT – even if they didn’t agree 100%.
———————————————————————————–
I find it’s useful on here to be able to engage with other posters who know the details of various issues which helps deepen your own knowledge. Auldheid knows his stuff and he make me think deeply about what I think is accurate or not.
So Auldheid’s latest post has had me go back again to look at his info on the Rangers Discounted Options Trust which preceded the EBT Trust and which forms the basis of the ‘Wee Tax case’ liability.
What I missed earlier was that D&P was asked to provide info to LNS on any documentation or info for payments made by Rangers to players through any trust going back to 1 July 1998. I now believe that there was a fudge so that the truth never actually emerged at LNS and a result acceptable to the footballing authorities was achieved and I place no blame on the tribunal members.
It seems to me that Rangers could have been operating this DOS scheme from 1998 to 2003 and the payments made under a similar scheme have already been held to be ‘irregular’ by a FTTT and UTT. why this wasn’t spotted by those preparing the SPL case is a mystery. I have no doubt that if evidence had been led on the matter then the result would have been very different at LNS.
And then there is the strange silence at the Rangers FTTT where there was no mention of the parallel Aberdeen Asset management case which impacted directly on Rangers who were operating a scheme similar to AAM.
I try to keep away from conspiracy theories but this one really takes the biscuit.
View Comment
neepheidPosted on4:24 pm - Jul 23, 2013
ecobhoy says:
July 23, 2013 at 3:40 pm
And then there is the strange silence at the Rangers FTTT where there was no mention of the parallel Aberdeen Asset management case which impacted directly on Rangers who were operating a scheme similar to AAM.
I try to keep away from conspiracy theories but this one really takes the biscuit.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
Surely the simple fact that RFC had negotiated a settlement figure with HMRC in respect of the tax/nic on undisclosed payments to players (the wee tax case, so called), and well before the LNS panel sat, made it inevitable that it would be found that a “sporting advantage” had been achieved by not disclosing payments, regardless of the FTT result.. I just assumed that a 3 point deduction would automatically be applied to every game in which one of the “wee tax case” players had appeared. I even posted to that effect before the FTT verdict was announced.What a simpleton 😕 . I hadn’t fully realised back then how bonnie wee Scotland really works.
However I did promise to “cease and desist” from criticising the LNS verdict some weeks ago, having become a bit of a pain on the subject, so I’ll leave it there.
View Comment
patsymcd1888Posted on4:42 pm - Jul 23, 2013
@Gym Trainer
Have checked Sky BBC NI and no mention of it, is it definately on 😀
View Comment
bluPosted on4:59 pm - Jul 23, 2013
helpmaboab says:
July 23, 2013 at 3:11 pm
=======================
Thanks boab. Sorry that you think there’s confusion in my post. I didn’t say that we should ignore the existence of Rangers, just that I thought some posters today seemed to see them only in terms of the very narrow perspective of a two-team league. It is fair comment to make an observation as to the aspirations of Rangers and its fans in the context of my whole post rather than only the part you abstracted? I did also of course make reference to other clubs and speculate on the opportunities for them in the current situation.
In my view Celtic has to date, and will continue to maximise this opportunity but others seem less inclined to make the most of the chance they’ve got.
As to moving on, that was the point of my post – Carpe Diem and all that. Maybe you’ve mis-read me?
View Comment
wottpiPosted on5:12 pm - Jul 23, 2013
I know I should keep torturing myself but here is another pant wetter from the bears den in relation to an Evening Times article on the players who didn’t take up Charlie’s TUPE offer
“20 players left last summer. That will never be repeated in our history I wouldn’t think. Some good players in there too. Not many have made an impact, reinforcing the old saying that once you have left Rangers, it is usually downhill all the way.”
Tell that to Rino Gatuso
FIFA World Cup: 2006
UEFA Under-21 European Championship Gold medal: 2000
UEFA Champions League: 2002–03, 2006–07
Coppa Italia: 2002–03
UEFA Super Cup: 2003, 2007
Serie A: 2003–04, 2010–11
Supercoppa Italiana: 2004, 2011
FIFA Club World Cup: 2007
Got to at least hand it to Sir Cardigan for spotting a ‘good un’ that Advocaat didn’t fancy much 🙂
View Comment
dedeideoprofundisPosted on5:19 pm - Jul 23, 2013
patsymcd1888 says:
July 23, 2013 at 4:42 pm
Have checked Sky BBC NI and no mention of it, is it definately on 😀
===================================
No mention of it on the BBC NI programme guide, so I would think not. Just conten yourself to watch the thunder and lightning.javascript:grin(‘:cry:’)
View Comment
TSFMPosted on5:23 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Folks, I understand the frustration some of you feel about the Celtic input here, however given the numbers involved, I think we have to be realistic in terms of our expectations.
There are four perspectives at play here;
1. the SFA/SPFL slant
2. the RFC/SEVCO slant
3. the sporting integrity slant
4. the “My Team” slant
Celtic fans constitute the single biggest group on the blog, so it is unavoidable that #4 above will weigh in favour of Celtic.
If people can’t accept that, then I think they are missing the big picture. The RFC scandal has had almost unanimous support from fans across the football spectrum. The Jack Irvine’s of this world desperately need to divide us. If we star bitching at each other, we would be more positively engaged by winding the whole thing up here.
Compromise is necessary, and I’m pretty sure that the Celtic constituency here will tell you that just as they are the largest group on the blog, they have been the most heavily moderated – and that will continue. Please trust us that we will not allow any single group to ride roughshod over others.
As for those who continually whine about TDs, PLEASE ignore them. We actually did a survey a couple of months ago which showed that TDs actually bear no relation whatsoever to the course of the debate.
And for those who whine about people disagreeing with them – this just isn’t the place for you.
View Comment
HirsutePursuitPosted on6:19 pm - Jul 23, 2013
ecobhoy says:
July 23, 2013 at 3:40 pm
…
I try to keep away from conspiracy theories but this one really takes the biscuit.
—————————————————————————–
http://www.scribd.com/doc/155076521/Project-William
http://www.scribd.com/doc/155076592/Draft-Restructuring-Workstreams-Matrix
Consider some of the responsibilities assigned to Gary Withey in the workstreams document dated 5th October 2011.
SFA & SPL regulations
•
Ability of Administrator to transfer/sell membership;
Points deduction or worseSFA & SPL regulations
•
Meetings and PREmergency window for the sale of players
•
Liaise with SPL/SFA regarding possibility of player sales to raise cash
http://www.scribd.com/doc/155527829/Phone-Calls
Then consider the email from Rod McKenzie to Gary Withey sent 6th October 2011..
From:
Rod Mckenzie [mailto:rod@harpermacleod.co.uk]Sent:
06 October 2011 08:58
To: Gary Withey
Cc: neildoncaster@scotprem.comSubject: Re: Today
Dear Gary
I understand that everything is exploratory at this stage.I have briefed the Chief Executive on our call. He has indicated that if there is an appetite to pursue this route that an outline paper is prepared setting out the process that is being proposed to achieve the discussed end. The paper should include, as well as the structure of the proposed transactions,how it is proposed that the points we discussed on compliance with SPL Membership Criteria, ground registration and player registration both with the SFA and SPL, would be addressed.Look forward to hearing from you.
…and the subsequent email from Gary Withey to Craig Whyte later the same day.
From: Gary Withey
Date: 6 October 2011 09:30Subject: FW: Today
To: Craig WhyteHe wasn’t asked to brief anyone on the call, but it seems as though there is a willingness to assist. Regards Gary Withey
PartnerT (Direct) +44 (0)20 7468 7234
F (Direct) +44 (0)20 7468 7334
Consider then, the very strange construction of the LNS Commission’s remit and the apparent unwillingness to present a meaningful case in pursuance of the “charges” against Rangers by the very same Mr McKenzie.
Whatever Mr Withey told Mr McKenzie, it seems that he became so alarmed by the news that an immediate phone call was made to Mr Doncaster to apprise him of the situation. This news was something he obviously felt went beyond his level of decision making.
Since he appears not to be the type to “wing-it”, one would imagine that Mr McKenzie would have sought very detailed instructions on what strategy should be employed when “prosecuting” the case against Rangers. Naturally enough, his go-to person at the SPL Mr Doncaster (himself a qualified lawyer) would have been able to provide the necessary input.
I take the 5th October 2011 as the start of the process that produced the 5-way agreement.
I just wonder how much of Mr McKenzie’s case strategy at the LNS Commission was planned/agreed by Mr Doncaster as part of that 5-way agreement.
View Comment
BarcabhoyPosted on6:55 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Collusion or stitch up or incompetence
The LNS verdict did not come as a surprise to some of the clubs in the SPL. Some of them were expecting exactly such a verdict.
That is not the same as saying there was not real anger when the decision was announced. There was real anger in at least one SPL boardroom
That is not the same as saying they colluded in the SPL’s case being “designed” to reach a compromise verdict. The process of charge and case construction did not involve any of the clubs.
It is often commented that the CEO of the SPL has no authority. That is only true, when it comes to changing the rules and constitution of the SPL. As long as the CEO operates within the rules and constitution, he has executive authority. There was no specific rule which stated that the CEO needed to consult with member clubs on a disciplinary matter concerning another member club..
Therefore Doncaster was free to use his “best judgement” in instructing the SPL’s solicitors on the targeted outcome of the LNS enquiry.
This was the single most important matter , involving the SPL’s legal team, in Doncaster’s time as CEO.
Ask yourself this simple question. If the legal team had dropped the ball and failed to achieve the desired result, do you think they would still be the legal advisors .
Next question. Are they still the legal advisors.
Next question. Will they be the legal advisors to the SPFL.
And the answers to those questions should point you in the direction of whether the LNS case was a stich up, an act of collusion to reach a soft landing for Rangers, or incompetence by the legal team.
View Comment
AuldheidPosted on7:04 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Barcabhoy says:
July 23, 2013 at 6:55 pm
In a southern drawl
“Oh you cynic you” 😉
View Comment
tic6709Posted on7:19 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Barcabhoy says:
July 23, 2013 at 6:55 pm
=======================
Nice to see you back.
wottpiPosted on7:21 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Barcabhoy says:
July 23, 2013 at 6:55 pm
Nice to see that like many, you just can’t stay away.
Hear what you say with regard to the SPL’s legal advisors and agree it is one to watch.
However here are my questions.
Who was the SPL’s CEO during this whole debacle?
Who was the CEO of the SPL who got a whacking great 16% pay rise according to the last set of accounts?
Who was appointed (presumably because they are seen as the ‘go to guy’) CEO of the newly formed of the SPFL?
Where any of the panel below who made the SPFL CEO’s appointment members of your ‘really angry SPL boardroom’?
“The panel (to appoint the SPFL CEO) was reported to be made up of Aberdeen chief executive Duncan Fraser, Celtic director Eric Riley, former Scottish Premier League chairman Ralph Topping and Stenhousemuir director Bill Darroch.”
View Comment
oldcarthabhoyPosted on7:21 pm - Jul 23, 2013
It would not surprise me if the Scottish Goverment, or Alex Salmond in particular, is considering bankrolling the SPFL for next year, through the much praised, but now tainted, proceeds of crime/CASHBACK scheme, aimed at helping youngsters.
In recent weeks, that money has gone to tennis, due more to Andy Murray’s mum never being away from his office in Regents Road, as well as more money going to bail out the golf Scottish Open!!! Golf needing public money…please!!!
We also have the recovered drug money going to fund the Scottish Communities Cup for the third year running. Once again, Kenny Mac Askill lost that fight with Alex Hitler.
Why has nobody raised an FOI about the meeting Salmond had with Craig Whyte weeks after he took over Rangers FC? And why, and for what purpose, did Salmond offer Craigie Boy, public monsy to help Rngers, this to the man with wealth off the radar screen…ask the question and share the response…
View Comment
AuldheidPosted on7:43 pm - Jul 23, 2013
ecobhoy says:
July 23, 2013 at 3:40 pm
” And then there is the strange silence at the Rangers FTTT where there was no mention of the parallel Aberdeen Asset management case which impacted directly on Rangers who were operating a scheme similar to AAM.”
What I found interesting is the advice given to Rangers to settle on the wee tax case from (mis)use of DOS and not appeal, came from exactly the same source fighting Rangers corner at the FTT on EBTs.
Of course the “DOS Trust” based on share options rather than loans, which was similar enough to how AAM used it to be accepted by Rangers on advice as the precedent on which Rangers should settle and not appeal, has a different construct from the loan based EBTs, the “loan” nature of which enabled the FTT to find for Rangers (pending appeal).
However both “DOS EBT” and EBT depended on hidden side letters which were crucial in settlement terms in the DOS case and perhaps it was just the smaller amount of tax due in the latter that could potentially be saved against the cost of appeal ,rather than any real tax principles to be defended, that guided the advice supplied to settle on DOS Trusts as opposed to fight on EBTs.
View Comment
AuldheidPosted on8:08 pm - Jul 23, 2013
HirsutePursuit says:
July 23, 2013 at 6:19 pm
Do you know if SPL rules have/had the equivalent of Article 5.1 in SFAs Articles re a member club having to ” observe the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship in accorfance with the rules of fair play”. ?
If not then Doncaster had no concerns in that respect (although the SFA who should have conducted the enquiry do) but if they exist in similar form and given Doncasters statement at
http://www.scotprem.com/content/default.asp?page=s109 which is undated but someone suggested Mar4ch 2012 from memory.
then article 5.1 should at least have had a mention in LNS commissioning. However I doubt the SPL knew the subtle difference between the two types of EBTs Rangers used and did not deliberately try to avoid focus on the DOS one which was already an irregular method of payment as used by Rangers from 2000 to 2003. but focussed on the registration issue..
View Comment
john clarkePosted on8:24 pm - Jul 23, 2013
HirsutePursuit says:
July 23, 2013 at 6:19 pm
”Do you know if SPL rules have/had the equivalent of Article 5.1 in SFAs Articles re a member club having to ” observe the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship in accorfance with the rules of fair play”. ?…”
—-
Don’t see anything in the May 2012 edition that refers specifically to that.
But perhaps articles 96 and 97 cover the point in so far as they require SPL members to abide by all SFA articles relevant to clubs.
I would imagine that any previous edition must have had a similar couple of Articles.
hangerheadPosted on8:42 pm - Jul 23, 2013
oldcarthabhoy says:
July 23, 2013 at 7:21 pm
8 1 Rate This
Why has nobody raised an FOI about the meeting Salmond had with Craig Whyte weeks after he took over Rangers FC? And why, and for what purpose, did Salmond offer Craigie Boy, public monsy to help Rngers, this to the man with wealth off the radar screen…ask the question and share the response…
——————————————————————————————————————————–
I might have an invented memory, but wasn’t this actually done and it was denied a formal reply as it wasn’t felt to be in the public interest?
View Comment
bluPosted on9:06 pm - Jul 23, 2013
hangerhead says:
July 23, 2013 at 8:42 pm
============================
hangerhead, your memory is OK. Relationships between the Scottish and UK governments might be in danger if the FOI request was met in full. Link here:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/106335/response/267910/attach/html/3/s2dCBFD00DE06A3FF8BF25A7137C269A479%201.pdf.html
AuldheidPosted on9:16 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Sunincapricorn says:
July 23, 2013 at 2:52 pm
Going back to your post Auldheid..
“Well respected journalist”..obtained cw’s domain etc.. I have seen that title bestowed on a certain AT many times. In regard to my previous post i would hope that it not this gentleman
______________________________________
It certainly is not, but he knows how the information was obtained and why it cannot be used andall three thought it credible at the time and the passage of time confirms they were right…
jean7brodiePosted on9:17 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Am I going daft or senile, but did I see a post earlier on where ‘someone’ referred to Celtic supporters as the ‘Shame of Scotland’ or something similar.
Don’t want to cause an uproar but sometimes I dream things and imagine them to be real 😳
All I ask for is confirmation not debate. Please tell me I’m sane.
TSFMPosted on9:23 pm - Jul 23, 2013
jean7brodie says:
July 23, 2013 at 9:17 pm
Am I going daft or senile, but did I see a post earlier on where ‘someone’ referred to Celtic supporters as ..
__________________________________________________
Yes they did. The matter has been deal with. Please do not feed the trolls.
View Comment
Robert CoylePosted on9:58 pm - Jul 23, 2013
oldcarthabhoy says:
July 23, 2013 at 7:21 pm
Why has nobody raised an FOI about the meeting Salmond had with Craig Whyte weeks after he took over Rangers FC? And why, and for what purpose, did Salmond offer Craigie Boy, public monsy to help Rngers, this to the man with wealth off the radar screen…ask the question and share the response…
—————————————————————————————————-
How do you know a meeting took place between salmond and whyte?
Bill1903Posted on10:06 pm - Jul 23, 2013
jean7brodie says:
Am I going daft or senile, but did I see a post earlier on where ‘someone’ referred to Celtic supporters as the ‘Shame of Scotland’ or something similar.
——————————————————–
He was referring to the Brentford game ‘high jinks’ I’d imagine.
View Comment
newtzPosted on10:27 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Boiler room scam three sentenced to jail in US
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23421571
Just saying like ….. : 😀
View Comment
briggsbhoyPosted on10:34 pm - Jul 23, 2013
TSFM says:
July 23, 2013 at 9:23 pm
Re: don’t feed the trolls
Do you think Jackass and “David Fraser” ever joined the debate on here 🙂 I wouldn’t put it past Jackass to stir things up
View Comment
macfurglyPosted on10:40 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Regarding LNS, is it not possible that this is realpolitik and that UEFA were informed that RFC had fielded ineligible players in every match, domestic and European, including Champions League for years and simply told the SFA to sort it out within Scotland pronto because the scale of the consequences were unmanageable. The SFA passed the message on to the SPL and the result is the Bryson / MacKenzie accord, completely reversing the understanding of all Club Secretaries at all levels of the game regarding the consequences of improperly registering a player, as acknowledged initially by MacKenzie, and leaving a hostage to fortune that must make them quake yet in case someone has the temerity to pursue it, but which is nonetheless better than facing what would otherwise be coming from UEFA?,
View Comment
Para HandyPosted on10:55 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Lots of talk on here about boycotting the national team.
Good to see that the national team seems to be boycotting players from Ibrox…
On a more serious note, concerning the discussions around the scenes from Brentford and the juxtaposition of the pictures of the Celtic and bus incidents both of course, indefensible. Behaviour such as this, mean that this year’s SPL Glasgow derbies to be held at Firhill have been soured for home fans as, due to concerns over safety, CFC “supporters’ cannot be housed in the main stand due to its wooden construction and as a result, Thistle fans are to be moved for these games only. This is at the direction of the police and council.
Forget Lawell commenting n the Five Way agreement. I would like to see him, the MSM and the rest of the footballing authorities comment on why, in 2013, we continue to allow such things to go unpunished.
No doubt this will not be a popular post with some on here, but McCoist’s inane mutterings only offered the chance to incite violence. In tis case it is a documented reality and yet no comment.
Yours,
Scunnered
View Comment
john clarkePosted on11:26 pm - Jul 23, 2013
macfurgly says:
July 23, 2013 at 10:40 pm
‘Regarding LNS, is it not possible that this is realpolitik and that UEFA were informed that RFC had fielded ineligible players in every match, domestic and European, including Champions League for years and simply told the SFA to sort it out within Scotland pronto because the scale of the consequences were unmanageable.
———-
What we , or at least I, don’t know is whether any body that is not formally recognised as part of the Uefa structure- national associations, leagues within those associations,clubs, players/players’ representatives and what not -has any ‘right’ to refer matters to, or to be heard by, any Uefa disciplinary body.
Auldheid, I think it was, drafted, or referred to a draft, submission on behalf of TSFM (?) to Uefa asking them to have a look at what was happening in Scottish Football.
I myself have emailed from time to time.
With no response to me, or, as far as I know,to Auldheid/TSFM
It seems to me that, Europe-wide, the supporters of football have no ‘rights’ of representation.
Uefa is in its own way as unaccountable to the supporters of all the clubs in Europeas the SFA appears to think they are to the supporters and life-blood of the game here in Scotland.
View Comment
CitibhoyPosted on11:31 pm - Jul 23, 2013
Parahsndy
Get a grip
Your last sentence infers violence at Brentford – it did not happen
Your either deaf dumb blind or malevolent
Or I’ll keep it a bit more simple for you
It’s like trying to Draw parallels between Seville and Manchester
You Can’t
View Comment
neepheidPosted on11:39 pm - Jul 23, 2013
macfurgly says:
July 23, 2013 at 10:40 pm
9 0 Rate This
Regarding LNS, is it not possible that this is realpolitik
++++++++++++
An awful lot of what goes on in the world today is “realpolitik”, and most of it is plain wrong. Due process is being subverted at every turn, and in every field of action. It is that old adage “the ends justify the means”. And of course both ends and means are determined either by powerful individuals, or by small groups of such individuals meeting in secret. This is the complete antithesis of democracy, pluralism, accountability and above all transparency. Sadly, it is the world we now live in. Maybe it was always like that, and I didn’t notice or care. The events of recent years (and not just in football) have certainly opened my eyes to how the world works.
Sorry TSFM, went a bit off topic a bit there.
View Comment
macfurglyPosted on11:40 pm - Jul 23, 2013
john clarke says:
July 23, 2013 at 11:26 pm
——————
I was thinking that UEFA were informed in the first place by the SFA, in a tail-between-the-legs kind of a way.
macfurglyPosted on11:46 pm - Jul 23, 2013
neepheid says:
July 23, 2013 at 11:39 pm
———-
Agreed.
Machiavelli?
The thing is, I have a choice of whether or not to participate as a paying customer in Scottish football. It would be a long habit to break, but I don’t know.
About the author