The recent revelations of a potential winding up order being served on Rangers Newco certainly does have a sense of “deja vu all over again” for the average reader of this blog.
It reminds me of an episode of the excellent Western series Alias Smith & Jones. The episode was called The Posse That Wouldn’t Quit. In the story, the eponymous anti-heroes were being tracked by a particularly dogged group of law-men whom they just couldn’t shake off – and they spent the entire episode trying to do just that. In a famous quote, Thaddeus Jones, worn out from running, says to Joshua Smith, “We’ve got to get out of this business!”
The SFM has been trying since its inception to widen the scope and remit of the discussion and debate on the blog. Unsuccessfully. Like the posse that wouldn’t quit, Rangers are refusing to go away as a story. With the latest revelations, I confided in my fellow mods that perhaps we too should get out of this business. I suspect that, even if we did, this story would doggedly trail our paths until it wears us all down.
The fact that the latest episode of the Rangers saga has sparked off debate on this blog may even confirm the notion subscribed to by Rangers fans that TSFM is obsessed with their club. However even they must agree that the situation with regard to Rangers would be of interest to anyone with a stake in Scottish Football; and that they themselves must be concerned by the pattern of events which started over a decade ago and saw the old club fall into decline on a trajectory which ended in liquidation.
But let me enter into a wee discussion which doesn’t merely trot out the notion of damage done to others or sins against the greater good, but which enters the realm of the damage done to one of the great institutions of world sport, Rangers themselves.
David Murray was regarded by Rangers fans as a hero. His bluster, hubris and (as some see it) arrogant contempt for his competitors afforded him a status as a champion of the cause as long as it was underpinned by on-field success.
The huge pot of goodwill he possessed was filled and topped-up by a dripping tap of GIRUY-ness for many years beyond the loss of total ascendency that his spending (in pursuit of European success) had achieved, and only began to bottom out around the time the club was sold to Craig Whyte. In retrospect, it can be seen that the damage that was done to the club’s reputation by the Murray ethos (not so much a Rangers ethos as a Thatcherite one) and reckless financial practice is now well known.
Notwithstanding the massive blemish on its character due to its employment policies, the (pre-Murray) Rangers ethos portrayed a particularly Scottish, perhaps even Presbyterian stoicism. It was that of a conservative, establishment orientated, God-fearing and law-abiding institution that played by the rules. It was of a club that would pay its dues, applied thrift and honesty in its business dealings, and was first to congratulate rivals on successes (witness the quiet dignity of John Lawrence at the foot of the aircraft steps with an outstretched hand to Bob Kelly when Celtic returned from Lisbon).
If Murray had dug a hole for that Rangers, Craig Whyte set himself up to fill it in. No neo-bourgeois shirking of responsibilities and duty to the public for him; his signature was more pre-war ghetto, hiding behind the couch until the rent man moved along to the next door. Whyte just didn’t pay any bills and with-held money that was due to be passed along to the treasury to fund the ever more diminished public purse. Where Murray’s Rangers had been regarded by the establishment and others as merely distasteful, Whyte’s was now regarded as a circus act, and almost every day of his tenure brought more bizarre and ridiculous news which had Rangers fans cringing, the rest laughing up their sleeve, and Bill Struth birling in his grave.
The pattern was now developing in plain sight. Murray promised Rangers fans he would only sell to someone who could take the club on, but he sold it – for a pound – to a guy whose reputation did not survive the most cursory of inspection. Whyte protested that season tickets had not been sold in advance, that he used his own money to buy the club. Both complete fabrications. Yet until the very end of Whyte’s time with the club, he, like Murray still, was regarded as hero by a fan-base which badly wanted to believe that the approaching car-crash could be avoided.
Enter Charles Green. Having been bitten twice already, the fans’ first instincts were to be suspicious of his motives. Yet in one of history’s greatest ironic turnarounds, he saw off the challenge of real Rangers-minded folk (like John Brown and Paul Murray) and their warnings, and by appealing to what many regard as the baser instincts of the fan-base became the third hero to emerge in the boardroom in as many years. The irony of course is that Green himself shouldn’t really pass any kind of Rangers sniff-test; personal, sporting, business or cultural; and yet there he is the spokesman for 140 years of the aspirations of a quarter of the country’s fans.
To be fair though, what else could Rangers fans do? Green had managed (and shame on the administration process and football authorities for this) to pick up the assets of the club for less (nett) than Craig Whyte and still maintained a presence in the major leagues.
If they hadn’t backed him only the certainty of doom lay before them. It was Green’s way or the highway in other words – and speaking of words, his sounded mighty fine. But do the real Rangers minded people really buy into it all?
First consider McCoist. I do not challenge his credentials as a Rangers minded man, and his compelling need to be an effective if often ineloquent spokesman for the fans. However, according to James Traynor (who was then acting as an unofficial PR advisor to the Rangers manager), McCoist was ready to walk in July (no pun intended) because he did not trust Green. The story was deliberately leaked, to undermine Green, by both Traynor and McCoist. McCoist also refused for a long period of time to endorse the uptake of season books by Rangers fans, even went as far as to say he couldn’t recommend it.
So what changed? Was it a Damascene conversion to the ways of Green, or was it the 250,000 shares in the new venture that he acquired. Nothing improper or unethical – but is it idealism? Is it fighting for the cause?
Now think Traynor. I realise that can be unpleasant, but bear with me.
Firstly, when he wrote that story on McCoist’s resignation, (and later backed it up on radio claiming he had spoken to Ally before printing the story), he was helping McCoist to twist Green’s arm a little. Now, and I’m guessing that Charles didn’t take this view when he saw the story in question, Green thinks that Traynor is a “media visionary”?
Traynor also very publicly, in a Daily Record leader, took the “New Club line” and was simultaneously contemptuous of Green.
What happened to change both their minds about each other? Could it have been (for Green) the PR success of having JT on board and close enough to control, and (for Traynor) an escape route for a man who had lost the battle with own internal social media demons?
Or, given both McCoist’s and Traynor’s past allegiance to David Murray, is it something else altogether?
Whatever it is, both Traynor and McCoist have started to sing from a totally different hymn sheet to Charles Green since the winding up order story became public. McCoist’s expert étude in equivocation at last Friday’s press conference would have had the Porter in Macbeth slamming down the portcullis (now there’s an irony). He carefully distanced himself from his chairman and ensured that his hands are clean. Traynor has been telling one story, “we have an agreement on the bill”, and Green another, “we are not paying it”.
And what of Walter Smith? At first, very anti-Charles Green, he even talked about Green’s “new club”. Then a period of silence followed by his being co-opted to the board and a “same club” statement. Now in the face of the damaging WUP story, more silence. Hardly a stamp of approval on Green’s credentials is it?
Rangers fans would be right to be suspicious of any non-Rangers people extrapolating from this story to their own version of Armageddon, but shouldn’t they also reserve some of that scepticism for Green and Traynor (neither are Rangers men, and both with only a financial interest in the club) when they say “all is well” whilst the real Rangers man (McCoist) is only willing to say “as far as I have been told everything is well”
As a Celtic fan, it may be a fair charge to say that I don’t have Rangers best interests at heart, but I do not wish for their extinction, nor do I believe that one should ignore a quarter of the potential audience for our national game. Never thought I’d hear myself say this, but apart from one (admittedly mightily significant) character defect, I can look at the Rangers of Struth and Simon, Gillick and Morton, Henderson and Baxter, and Waddell and Lawrence (and God help me even Jock Wallace) with fondness and a degree of nostalgia.
I suspect most Rangers fans are deeply unhappy about how profoundly their club has changed. To be fair, my own club no longer enchants me in the manner of old. As sport has undergone globalisation, everything has changed. Our relationship to our clubs has altered, the business models have shifted, and the aspirations of clubs is different from that of a generation ago. It has turned most football clubs into different propositions from the institutions people of my generation grew up supporting, but Rangers are virtually unrecognisable.
The challenge right now for Rangers fans is this. How much more damage will be done to the club’s legacy before this saga comes to an end?
And by then will it be too late to do anything about it?
Most people on this blog know my views about the name of Green’s club. I really don’t give a damn because for me it is not important. I do know, like Craig Whyte said, that in the fullness of time there will be a team called Rangers, playing football in a blue strip at Ibrox, and in the top division in the country.
I understand that this may be controversial to many of our contributors, but I hope that this incarnation of Rangers is closer to that of Lawrence and Simon than to Murray and Souness.
bawsbustedanatha
Realistically what are you expecting ?
99%+ of those saying that they wont be back will be unless they are looking for an excuse (tipping point) to give it up for other reason/s.
This just kicks the can down the road. This will have to be looked at again if HMRC win the appeal.
scapaflow14 says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 12:16
“I think the UTT may find Lord Nimmo’s report of great interest”
Unfortunately not, as new evidence cannot be introduced or heard at the UTT – the appeal is based purely on points of law (i.e. in respect of tax). On the other hand, it does raise the question of what evidence was actually produced during the LNS enquiry, and was the entire commission based on a very narrow selection of said evidence? Based on comments made by Mark Daly et al, that view would appear to be supported. By not looking at the bigger picture in the context of what “sport”, professional or otherwise, is supposed to be about, we end up in a place where cheats can prosper. And what of the world’s greatest Administrator (one former club in liquidation and the other unfortunately heading in that direction should a buyer not be found)? No doubt he’ll award himself a pay-rise; after all, he’s played a blinder throughout. Franz Kafka could not better this saga if he had lived to be 200.
Another interesting wee comment the UTT may consider
“Although it is clear to us from Mr Odam’s evidence that Oldco’s failure to disclose the side-letters to the SPL and the SFA was at least partly motivated by a wish not to risk prejudicing the tax advantages of the EBT scheme,”
I wonder what the annual admin costs are for registering players contracts with the authorities?
If it only costs £25k a season not to – why bother?
With High Noon having been passed we move into the next phase. What should that be?
I honestly believe Scottish Football and indeed Scottish Society should move on. You can either believe RFC 1872 were treated leniently, fairly or harshly. That’s your choice. But the treatment is in the past (UTT excepted).
The future we create is still to come. It can only be for the good of us all if we start afresh. Our game deserves high quality, even handed leadership that has the confidence of the clubs and the supporters. The issues teh game faces are serious. Reconstruction, national team standing etc are
The supporters must play their part by concerning themselves with the present and the future not the past. Same for the club owners
The game’s regulators however have the confidence of the supporters of no team. They are a part of the past and have no place in the game’s future. We move on when they’ve moved on. For the good of the game they have to go. Step 1.
verselijkfc says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 12:32
Aye, sadly you’re correct, was letting my enthusiasm get the better of me. However, it does leave me thinking what the feck were the rest of the FTT panel smoking
The Tax Tribunal has held (subject to appeal) that Oldco was acting within the law in setting up and operating the EBT scheme
The SPL presented no argument to challenge the decision of the majority of the Tax Tribunal and Mr McKenzie stated expressly that for all purposes of this Commission’s Inquiry and Determination the SPL accepted that decision as it stood, without regard to any possible appeal by HMRC
.
Accordingly we proceed on the basis that the EBT arrangements were lawful.
Can booted?
In terms of the non-finding of a need to change sporting results, the key paragraphs are 87-89: explaining why, having established that the EBTs did constitute payments, the non-registration of these payments (and hence the misregistration of contracts) did not result in players being ineligible.
What you can see from para 87 (pasted below) is that the SPL – through their solicitor Rod McKenzie – were the ones to raise the possibility through which the construction of the rules could be such as to allow this finding; and that the SPL, in addition, did not press for the original construction. In other words, the panel appears to be stating that the SPL themselves gave to the panel the argument for the misregistration not to have caused player ineligibility, and hence for no sporting punishment to be required. Interesting.
[87] Mr McKenzie explained to us that SPL Rule D1.13 had hitherto been understood to mean
that if, at the time of registration, a document was not lodged as required, the consequence was
that a condition of registration was broken and the player automatically became ineligible to play
in terms of SPL Rule D1.11. He accepted however that there was scope for a different
construction of the rule, to the effect that, as the lodging of the document in question was a
condition of registration, the registration of the player would be liable to revocation, with the
consequence that the player would thereafter become ineligible to play. He accepted that no
provision of the Rules enabled the Board of the SPL retrospectively to terminate the registration
of the player. It became apparent from his submissions that Mr McKenzie was not pressing for a
finding that Issue 3(c), together with the concluding words of Issue 3(b), had been proved.
tibfkaelc says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 11:30
That was a rather inaccurate summary of the findings, what with mention of players being ineligible and administrative errors.
Hmmm, so it’s the ‘Old Co’ that are responsible for the failure to register players properly. And here’s me thinking that it was football clubs rather than holding companies that registered players. I guess that’s why I’m not a high flyer in legal circles….
Greenockjack
Nothing nuclear to be revealed, even now ?
There was never anything nuclear to reveal or at least the term “nuclear” was a gross exaggeration and somewhat irresponsibly used.
—————————————————————————————
The amount of thumbs up leads me to think that my post wasn´t clear enough.
It is directed to whoever in the media who gave Barcabhoy his “nuclear” info.
So if there were about 20 players with EBTs & side letters, that’s a fine of £12,500 per player -but many would have had these for say 3 season’s registrations, so a draconian fine of just over £4000 per instance of not gaining a sporting advantage. Shocking. Just shocking.
Long Time Lurker
“Rangers FC is of course now owned and operated by Newco, which bears no responsibility for the matters with which we are concerned. For the reasons already given, we have decided against the imposition of a sporting sanction.”
My reading of this is that LNS sees the new club as a direct continuation of the old-club but sees the old-club as distinct and separate from the old company. So, no “sporting sanctions” on the old-club but instead a financial one is imposed on the old company. An utter nonsense.
Does that mean they get away with it?
Well, I didn’t see that coming.
You couldn’t make it up……..LNS’s laughable logic that no unfair advantage was gained by a club actively hiding payments from the governing bodies that had set sporting rules in place to prevent any member from attracting higher calibre footballers through undisclosed payments and thereby distorting fair competition.
Scottish Football’s integrity…they think it’s all over……….it is now!
greenockjack says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 12:37
Nothing nuclear to be revealed, even now ?
There was never anything nuclear to reveal or at least the term “nuclear” was a gross exaggeration and somewhat irresponsibly used.
—————————————————————————————
The amount of thumbs up leads me to think that my post wasn´t clear enough.
It is directed to whoever in the media who gave Barcabhoy his “nuclear” info.
————————————————-
Yet Rangers are experiencing the chill of their very own nuclear winter right now, and for a while to come yet by the look of it
LNS states: ‘the SPL did not seek the imposition by us of
any specific sanction’.
So the message for each club is simple; put away 250k then pay your players anyway you like, brown envelopes are cool, so long as you have the cash to pay the fine. I you’re really fly…stiff all vendors for a year, then invent a newco, transfer any valuable assets over and cut lose millions of debt, especailly that pesky taxman, and the oldco get the fine! Win, win, win!
You have to laugh!
Dear SPL and SFA,
Can we propose a league of 1 club at the top of the new pyramid, that super, too big to fail club to gain entry to the highest level of european football competition each season. Whomsoever they choose to play of a weekend shall be left for that club and your venerable institutions to decide on. We, the rather annoying smaller clubs shall be leaving your tutelage to set up our own little Saturday league and will not bother you with our tiresome complaints any more. If you would let UEFA know we would be grateful.
Yours etc, etc.
Administrative error = Honest Mistake.
Plus ca change
greenockjack says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 12:31
I haven’t had an excuse for 19 years.
I have been a Celtic ST holder for 26 of the last 27 years, (spent 1 year working abroad) and a fervent member of the tartan army, (paid to follow the national team on nearing 100 occasions). I hate to turn my back on my club after all these years of suffering at the hands of the establishment, but I can no longer justify spending £1 more on Scottish Football. I have sold my Celtic shares today and will never attend another professional football match in Scotland.
As for the national team, who would want to support a team representing such a corrupt footballing country.
“While there is no
question of dishonesty, individual or corporate, we nevertheless take the view that the nondisclosure
must be regarded as deliberate, in the sense that a decision was taken that the sideletters
need not be or should not be disclosed”
There it is right there. They are basically laughing in our faces. Scottish football is dead. Goodnight.
LNS states: ‘The SPL presented no argument to challenge the decision of the majority of the Tax Tribunal and Mr McKenzie stated expressly that for all purposes of this Commission’s Inquiry and Determination the SPL accepted that decision as it stood, without regard to any possible appeal by HMRC. Accordingly we proceed on the basis that the EBT arrangements were lawful.’
ecobhoy says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 12:45
That bit stuck out to me as well – you weren’t being asked to judge if EBT’s were lawful, just whether all contractual payments had been disclosed, which they clearly weren’t.
LNS states: ‘There was no evidence before us as to whether any other members of the SPL used similar EBT schemes, or the effect of their doing so. Moreover, we have received no evidence from which we could possibly say that Oldco could not or would not have entered into the EBT arrangements with players if it had been required to comply with the requirement to disclose the arrangements as part of the players’ full financial entitlement or as giving rise to payment to players’.
Paragraphs 84 to 89 appear to suggest that a player who is registered cannot be ineligible to play – whether his registration was done properly with all relevant documentation or not. Paragraph 87 explains the re-interpretation of the relevant rule.
If a player’s registration is revoked once failure to lodge paperwork becomes known, then he becomes ineligible from that point onwards.
However, no players’ registrations were revoked – so they were all eligible to play.
Stupendous.
Yes, they were improperly registered, but their registrations were not revoked, or terminated. So they were eligible to play. I wondered how they’d manage to avoid the “title-stripping” scenario, even if they didn’t have to do it themselvesbut this is an utter cracker.
I’m sorry Craig Broon and all the folks at Pittodrie, but I’m nae having any more to do with this nonsense. Thanks for the Bayern game in 1983.
Corrupt? If it looks like a goat and smells like a goat …
The Fudge Judge did as he was asked.
The result is no real shock to anyone on here, most are just extremely disappointed as even though they suspected this result, they had hoped for another.
It has come in exactly as I thought it might but I am still disappointed as the amending of past scores and titles won, would have been forever a good reminder (much like The Barcelona museum) of a sordid past.
Important for me is that this, contrary to the line a lot of media pundits have been pushing since the FTT result, Rangers were indeed found guilty. Unfortunately the law men have to read it as they see it, it was not the role of LNS to make judgements based on the reasons why Rangers did not disclose the side contracts. I believe it is 100% correct, Rangers did not gain a competitive advantage by not disclosing the documents, the advantage was had by having the ability to pay inflated wages using those documents.
That is where the real sporting crime lay and that is why the FTT was more of a shock to me, I now put my trust (if you pardon the pun) in the appeal process finding in favour of the taxpayer.
I love my football and I love my club so I am undecided at this point what actions to take, maybe none. Unlike the decision Celtic had, to vote on Newco Rangers automatic access to The SPL, I don’t think they have any say on this so me refusing to buy mechanise or subscribing to the magazine and TV on a monthly basis, is not a credible threat at this point.
My overriding issue with this whole thing right from the start has not changed, in fact, I am even more convinced of it now. I believe there is a genuine feeling within the past owners, current owners, management, staff and fans that they, as Rangers followers, really are the people.
This disappoints me more than anything else!
scapaflow14 says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 12:28
The whole interpretation of the registration issue is a muddle.
From what I can see LNS seems to be saying that as there are no rules in SFA or SPL to deal with a case when it is found ‘after the fact’ that the original registation was incomplete and therefore the original registration stands until it,in some unexplained way, becomes revoked and the player was therefore not ineligible.
If there is no rule to deal with finding an error ‘after the fact’ then how the hell can a registration ever be revoked on the basis of it being incorrect. Therefore once you are registred with a club that should be it until you re-register due to transferring to another club.
Frankly that just seems daft but I’m not surprised by the LNS view in that I have always had a feeling the the footballing rules would not be tight enough to deal with the situation at hand.
Presumably players registered with a club and SFA should be able to play in any competition until a problem is found with a new application and that problem has to be discovered at the time of application.
Ok, I can understand how the panel arrived at its decison, and while I don’t agree that the punishment is any way proportional to the offence, I can see why the panel thinks it is.
I can also forsee huge difficulties, if the UTT overturns the FTT, because at that point the “no sporting advantage” line is also reversed.
In many respects this is the worst of all possible results, whilst the crticism of the club is devestating, by virtue of the reliance on the “no sporting advantage” line, it cannot be seen as the final word in this miserable saga.
We are where we are as a result, not just of the actions of various Ranger’s boards, but also because of the actions of the boards of the “sport’s” governing bodies.
Consequently, my message to Mr Liewell is very simple. Until the boards of the governing bodies have been cleared out and replaced by people untainted by partcipation in this scandal, don’t bother sending me any info about season books. If you do, the reply will be in the best traditions of Father Jack:
“Feck off! and stick it up yer erse!”
I suggest anti-rangers posters (e.g. Brenda) ignore this post.
As I’ve said many times on here, can someone tell me how Rangers are cheats? i.e. where was the dishonesty to gain an advantage?
A big concern on TSFM has been the ability of the MSM to create a common understanding by subscribers by repeating something (lies) often enough. In my opinion, the exact same happens on here. The accusations of Rangers cheats is repeated constantly without any real consideration of the evidence.
Time to give TRFC a break maybe?
AND NO THE HEART OF THE MATTER
LNS states: ‘[106] We therefore proceed on the basis that the breach of the rules relating to disclosure did not give rise to any sporting advantage, direct or indirect. We do not therefore propose to consider those sanctions which are of a sporting nature.
[107] We nevertheless take a serious view of a breach of rules intended to promote sporting
integrity. Greater financial transparency serves to prevent financial irregularities. There is
insufficient evidence before us to enable us to draw any conclusion as to exactly how the senior
management of Oldco came to the conclusion that the EBT arrangements did not require to be
disclosed to the SPL or the SFA.
In our view, the apparent assumption both that the side-letter arrangements were entirely discretionary, and that they did not form part of any player’s contractual entitlement, was seriously misconceived.
Over the years, the EBT payments disclosed in Oldco’s accounts were very substantial; at their height, during the year to 30 June 2006, they amounted to more than £9 million, against £16.7 million being that year’s figure for wages and salaries. There is no evidence that the Board of Directors of Oldco took any steps to obtain proper external legal or accountancy advice to the Board as to the risks inherent in agreeing to pay players through the EBT arrangements without disclosure to the football authorities.
The directors of Oldco must bear a heavy responsibility for this. While there is no question of dishonesty, individual or corporate, we nevertheless take the view that the nondisclosure
must be regarded as deliberate, in the sense that a decision was taken that the sideletters
need not be or should not be disclosed.
No steps were taken to check, even on a hypothetical basis, the validity of that assumption with the SPL or the SFA. The evidence of Mr Odam (cited at paragraph [43] above) clearly indicates a view amongst the management of Oldco that it might have been detrimental to the desired tax treatment of the payments being made by Oldco to have disclosed the existence of the side-letters to the football authorities.
[108] Given the seriousness, extent and duration of the non-disclosure, we have concluded that
nothing less than a substantial financial penalty on Oldco will suffice. Although we are well
aware that, as Oldco is in liquidation with an apparently massive deficiency for creditors (even
leaving aside a possible reversal of the Tax Tribunal decision on appeal), in practice any fine is
likely to be substantially irrecoverable and to the extent that it is recovered the cost will be borne
by the creditors of Oldco, we nevertheless think it essential to mark the seriousness of the
contraventions with a large financial penalty.
Since Issues 1 to 3 relate to a single course of conduct, a single overall fine is appropriate. Taking into account these considerations, we have decided to impose a fine of £250,000 on Oldco
.
[109] It is the board of directors of Oldco as a company, as distinct from the football
management or players of Rangers FC as a club, which appears to us to bear the responsibility
for the breaches of the relevant rules. All the breaches which we have found were therefore
clearly committed by Oldco.
We see no room or need for separate findings of breaches by
Rangers FC, which was not a separate legal entity and was then part (although clearly in football and financial terms the key part) of the undertaking of Oldco. Rangers FC is of course now owned and operated by Newco, which bears no responsibility for the matters with which we are concerned.
When Hamilton Accies’ cup run is over that will be me done with scottish football. Guilty of fielding ineligible players but no punishment save for a fine that will never be paid? I didn’t see such a whitewash coming I have to say. I am truly sickened to my core as I write this. Our game died today and more fool those who continue to prop it up after this. You are being taken for mugs.
wottpi says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 12:54
My reading is that the rules did not forsee a club acting to such an extend.
It also appears that if the UTT find that the use of EBTs by RFC was illegal then then today’s findings by LNS based on that premise would no longer hold true – the club would then have had an unfair advantage.
Disgusted to be honest, no real surprize though. My season books getting chucked I’m tired hoping Scottish football will ever change. From top to bottom it stinks. P Lawell playing the quiet piper im convinced he didnt stand up to what he should have been. Celtics interests in fairness should have put put before all else. Glad I can rest now need a new sport.
Right thats sky sports cancelled Season ticket straight in the bin .I cannot take anymore of this corruption and that is what it is. Better things to spend my hard earned money on. Scottish football died today R.I P
POP AT D&P
Issue 4
[110] Failure to respond timeously to legitimate requests for the provision of information is a
serious breach of the rules. If the football authorities are to perform their functions effectively,
such requests by them must be met. In the present case, at the time that the initial request was
made, and throughout the subsequent period, Oldco was in administration and the administrators were acting as its agents.
The administrators had the responsibility of discharging Oldco’s obligations, including those to the football authorities. They did not do so, and thus caused Oldco to be in breach of the Rules. We have decided, however, without wishing to detract from the gravity of the breach, that no separate financial penalty should be imposed on Oldco in this regard. Instead, we shall impose an admonition
ismellafix says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 12:44
My dilemma is whether to renew my Clyde season ticket. We’re such a ‘diddy team’ these days that I can hardly claim that Rangers cheating had any effect on my club (aside from a big, if slightly soiled, pay day twice this season), but you still think ‘What am I actually paying my money for?’. I thought it was to watch a fair competition, where teams started out at the start of the season with as much chance as any other of winning the league (at least until the football started, and dispelled that notion!), and that teams would be subject to the same rules, being applied without fear or favour. I now find it confirmed beyond reasonable doubt that it is not the case.
Given that TRFC will almost certainly not be playing in the same league as us next season ,despite what the league reconstructionists might say, I almost find myself thinking, well, they’ll be gone, and in reality, the only time their existence and influence will have a bearing on my team (aside from the usual shenanigans to try and starve the lower leagues of as much money as possible, but that’s not the sole preserve of TRFC) will be when we meet once every decade or so in a cup tie. Clyde will go on their quiet way in the lower leagues, away from all that nastiness, but it still doesn’t make me feel any better about shelling out to watch what is no more than American Wrestling, all noise and ….er… long balls, but nothing substantial or credible.
angus1983 says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 12:50
Thanks for translating that section.
Confounding logic if that is indeed what is meant.
In a nutshell LNS has said
( in my words)
The players concerned were found to have been incorrectly registered
However
No player was ever guilty of being “ineligible to play” simply because of having been incorrectly registered by his Club
Because
It is not possible for any player to be ineligible to play simply because his Club broke the rules by “incorrect registration” The argument is that incorrect registration is not a barrier to playing during the period when the incorrect registration is undisclosed
A player can only have his incorrect registration turned into “ineligibility to play” by the Authorities They can only do this when they become aware of it
.Even then the authorities do not have any rule under which a decision to turn “incorrect registration” into “ineligibility to play” is backdated
All that can be done by the authorities is to decide an appropriate punishment for “incorrect registration
This has been set at £250k which will be added to the debts of RFC
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
So
If Spartans had won the Scottish Cup but it was later discovered that they had failed to sign some form making player ineligible in an earlier round then the punishment would not have been withdrawal of a trophy
…………
Implications
1. Any Club able and willing to conceal an offence that would make a player ineligible to player will never lose any titles or trophies as a consequence
At worst they may be fined
With one exception
2. If RFC had been caught fielding an incorrectly registered immediately after a SC game they may have lost the tie
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
The real culprit in all of this is CO He knew full well that RFC were incorrectly registering players and did nothing about it
He should resign
scapaflow14 says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 12:56
0 0 i Rate This
…..”We are where we are as a result, not just of the actions of various Ranger’s boards, but also because of the actions of the boards of the “sport’s” governing bodies.
Consequently, my message to Mr Liewell is very simple. Until the boards of the governing bodies have been cleared out and replaced by people untainted by partcipation in this scandal, don’t bother sending me any info about season books. …”
======================================================
So, Scapa, who exactly are these people – we don’t even need Ally McCoist’s dog whistle to find out. The Board members of the SPL are: Ralph Topping (SPL Chairman), Neil Doncaster (SPL Chief Executive), Eric Riley (Celtic FC), Stephen Thompson (Dundee United FC), Duncan Fraser (Aberdeen FC) and Michael Johnston (Kilmarnock FC). (source SPL website 28/02/13)
Off with all the heads of these Rangers haters/lovers? Or closer scrutiny of their actions? Maybe that’s something that TSFM could focus on?
Alternatively Scottish football fans could do ‘walking away’ and leave them to it.
It appears that LNS agreed that RFC broke the rules.
It also appears that he agrees that no consequences should arise out of that.
It also appears that he agrees that no enforceable punishments should arise either.
The record will show that RFC did not gain any competitive advantage by their leveraging of an economic advantage.
Experience will tell everyone – other than RFC fans – that they did gain a competitive advantage, particularly in those cases where the margin of victory were so narrow compared to the wide economic leveraging that went on.
There is no doubt in my mind that Scottish Football has compete failed to enforce its own rules on a systematic basis since this crisis began last February. Thy had one last chance to apply their rule and uphold the principles of sporting integrity. Thy failed to do so, and in my view the verdict today was political and not made on the bases of the above principles.
The battle for that sporting integrity is now completely lost. The club we believe had cheated has emerged as a true 21st century Schizoid Man, with all rights and intact and no responsibilities due.
They have emerged as they wished from the beginning, with their history intact, with no debt, and with no consequences of their actions arising.
My personal conclusion is that if Scottish Football is happy with that, then they are welcome to it. I on the other hand will choose not to participate any further. Any club that is happy to participate in a league where sporting principles have been so casually laid aside probably also deserves everything it gets.
Football no longer has any attraction for me. I will still have the memories, but like Rangers Football Club, the history of those memories ended in season 2012-13.
The game is well and truly a bogey, i’ve been a Celtic fan all my life but thats it now…i never liked wrestling so im not about to start paying to watch football on the same basis…Scottish football is fixed, with only one team the beneficiary, thats what today’s result means. They can do whatever they want and its all ok…..well if you’re happy to go along with that, good luck, im out…..what a disgrace!
shield2012 says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 12:58
—————————————————
I know you have a long standing problem with the word “cheat” but I believe you are focussing too much on the obvious, bribing the referee or playing with 12 players type of cheating. I tend not to use the word in relation to this case but it is still clear to me that cheating took place:
Dictionary: To Cheat: 1. Swindle, 2. Fraud, 3. Deceive, 4. Elude, 5. Violate Rules
Players not paying tax (admitted by Rangers) = Swindle
Club not paying PAYE (admitted by Rangers) = Fraud
Club not disclosing letters (admitted by Rangers) = Deceive
Club not coopirating with FTT or LNS (documented) = Elude
I don’t think I need any examples of viotation of rules do I?
I do agree with you, I don’t see the players as cheats, not in the tradional sense. The business cheated, the officials cheated, RANGERS CHEATED.
Just my opinion.
shield2012 says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 12:58
================================================
Shield, do you read the LNS findings as concluding that Rangers rules breaches were the equivalent of those that led to Spartans and East Stirlingshire being ejected from the Scottish Cup?
goosygoosy says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 13:03
Surely that means that Spartans were thrown out the Scottish cup for nothing. It was only found out after the game that the player was ineligible, so presumably that would mean he was eligible for that Scottish cup tie?
They’ve tied themselves in so many knots to try and save TRFC that almost any decision that the SFA/SPL make must surely now be subject to legal challenge.
It is now more than ever, a case of us and them.
Please remember this.
Only thing I’m chucking is my will to listen to reasoned debate.
Thanks for the effort and time to explain what should happen in the modern age.
There is a requirement in this nation for our voice to be heard, and for me, it is not in an over censored, PC, anonymous forum. I am weak, If you cant beat em.
Goodbye.
Time for other clubs to show that their testicles remain operative. Withdraw from this Omnishambles League. Withdraw membership from the SFA. Its their ba’ and nobody else is gettin a kick. Withdraw players from the International team. Demand the resignation of Brother Ogilvie. These and other sanctions should be applied forthwith. There is no excuse for this alleged unbiased decision by LNS and his enquiry.
Note to SFA Member clubs. Read the comments above from other contributors to this forum. Read the disgust in their words that the Establishment club can be proven guilty of financial doping but did not gain an advantage.
I’ll get ma fishing rod.
I have to say, LNS has delivered a balanced and sensible verdict based on the information. All of “did he consider this” we’re covered (such as the indirect sporting advantage of keeping the EBTs secret).
There is one massive problem with the punishment, and I blame the SPL. LNS ruled based on sporting advantage. He clearly is not aware that precedent exists that a lack of sporting advantage hasn’t stopped other clubs being ejected from competitions and fined.
I think UEFA needs to have a look at this.
justpedylan says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 12:33
I honestly believe Scottish Football and indeed Scottish Society should move on. You can either believe RFC 1872 were treated leniently, fairly or harshly. That’s your choice. But the treatment is in the past (UTT excepted).
The future we create is still to come. It can only be for the good of us all if we start afresh. Our game deserves high quality, even handed leadership that has the confidence of the clubs and the supporters. The issues teh game faces are serious. Reconstruction, national team standing etc are
The supporters must play their part by concerning themselves with the present and the future not the past. Same for the club owners
The game’s regulators however have the confidence of the supporters of no team. They are a part of the past and have no place in the game’s future. We move on when they’ve moved on. For the good of the game they have to go. Step 1.
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
To move on things would need to change and as we have seen recently this will never happen, even apart from the FTT result and this latest bag of corruption we have had for months Mr Green, Mr McCoist, and others throwing comments and accusations about without “fear or favour” They have called the SPL/SFA cheats, liars and thieves without even being asked to explain their comments, we have had Green saying openly he refuses to recognise the supposedly independent panel set up for this inquiry, verbal and physical threats against previous panel members, Green making statements he will never allow The Rangers to play in the SPL.
The list is endless and the consequences are zero, if the Chairman, Manager or CEO of any other club in Scotland were to make these defiant statements and if that club were to allow the official press releases that come out of Ibrox then they would be up before the beaks to explain themselves and warned about future behavior.
As I said previously, what really is the point any longer?
We have all been paying out hard earned money to watch our teams take part in competitions that are now legally recognised to have had one team with an illegal, unfair financial advantage but there will be no retrospective punishment applied.
I have already cancelled my satellite subscriptions to Celtic TV, Sky and ESPN and I have contacted Celtic and the SFA online shopping to take me off their mailing list for merchandise.
I like many thousands of fans spend a lot of money every year on merchandise, my children and grand children have all the latest Celtic and Scotland outfits and dvd’s as soon as they come out but Im afraid future Christmas and Birthday gifts will be Barca, Madrid, Spain etc.
I know I will never watch another game involving either any Scottish club or the international team, I will probably still have a look at blogs such as this but I will never have any financial input.
http://youtu.be/e4Eo4-oyejk
Anybody know if we can can send season tickets back to relevant clubs early? no interests in attending more games, don’t want dosh back either. Just feel this is only way I can make my most miniscule of statements.
Might not be a popular point of view but I have now read the findings twice now fairly fast and I find it difficult to see how they could actually be any different given the evidence apparently submitted to the tribunal.
Later today/tonight I will take a more leisurely look at it and see whether I am on the same opinion or not. Not that my opinion means anything and neither will the LNS one to those expecting more. But that’s life although I wonder whether the collapse of the high internet expectations of some for LNS wielding an avenging sword will actually be mirrored in the wider support.
That will be critical and obviously could run the risk of serious damage to Scottish Football – we will just have to await developments on that front and it might take until the sale of next season’s STs to reach an informed conclusion.
The decision seems to be more sympathetic to the Club than to its opponents. I’m also struggling to understand how, by comparison, Spartans could be deemed to have gained a competitive advantage by omitting to date a second signature.
The peepil won. Scottish football is dead. Time to move on.
Goosygoosy
I often find your conspiracies and paranoia ridiculous, but in this case:
I find your logic very piercing.
Chilling implications for the registration of players – just don’t get caught.
blu says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 13:08
Folk, including myself, have been rightly critical of not just Messers Murray, Whyte and Green, but of the men who made up their respective boards. We should hold the boards of the governing bodies to exactly the same standard. At least with the Ranger’s boards, some people, John Greig for example, did say enough is enough and resign. I wish in Mr Greig’s case he had come out and said why he went, though I also understand why he didn’t. In stark contrast the governing bodies support for the Aunt Sallys as has been total and umcompromising.
I have never wanted Rangers to die, though there is a large part of their baggage I would like to see consigned to the 17th Century where it belongs. The problem is that the mess that Ranger’s created needed to be dealt with, and until it is dealt with, neither Rangers, their supporters or anyone else in football will be able to move on.
We need a root and branch clear out, until that happens, I’m afraid things will continue as they are, with folk on both sides becoming more entrenched, more bitter. Sadly for Ranger’s I’m afraid that this will only encourage “lunatic majority” to behave more outrageously.
Truly, there are no winners today, only losers
It would appear that Rangers spent the last ten years actively hiding from the authorities (tax and sporting) something that was actually not illegal (as things currently stand).
Hmmmmm….
…and even if you do get caught there will be no significant penalties.
Has LNS just undermined the entire foundation of the SFA & SPL’s player registration rules?
Night Terror says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 13:23
0 0 Rate This
Goosygoosy
I often find your conspiracies and paranoia ridiculous, but in this case:
Implications
1. Any Club able and willing to conceal an offence that would make a player ineligible to player will never lose any titles or trophies as a consequence
I find your logic very piercing.
Chilling implications for the registration of players – just don’t get caught.
==============================
just don’t get caught…..until after the game
It gives me absolutely no pleasure to say “I told you so”. There was never any prospect of any meaningful sanction being imposed here. LNS even manages to peddle the oldco died but club survived line in his contradictory ruling. The one recourse we may have to justice is in the hands of UEFA but that is dependent on another European club complaining about ineligible players. Will any step up to the plate.
I too am done with football. I can no longer stomach the crushing disappointment and outright corruption evident in the Scottish game. I will retire to the fairways and greens of my beloved old course; there to seek solace in a game which still values sporting integrity and fairness above all.
For me the Rubicon has been crossed its now time and I can no longer financially support a morally deficient and corrupt game in this country. I love my club but if l opt to continue to buy Sts lm propping up a regime with no moral compass or care for the fans who pay their wages. Its over and out for me. I could cry…………..shame on us all for letting them away with it.
areyouaccusingmeofmendacity says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 13:13
goosygoosy says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 13:03
Surely that means that Spartans were thrown out the Scottish cup for nothing. It was only found out after the game that the player was ineligible, so presumably that would mean he was eligible for that Scottish cup tie?
They’ve tied themselves in so many knots to try and save TRFC that almost any decision that the SFA/SPL make must surely now be subject to legal challenge.
……………
Not really
The one exception in all of this is a complaint by a club against another club after a certain match on a certain date
If the complaint is made within the permitted time interval after the match then the result of that match may be voided and the tie awarded to the complaining club.This has happened frequently in cup competitions
For league games I am unaware if there is a deadline date for a complaint.
If not then Celtic are entitled to raise a complaint of incorrect registration about any match v RFC lost in any season when the title was decided by the result of that match
I doubt if that will happen
Rangers committed suicide by employing business practices that resulted in their liquidation that didn’t even give them a competitive advantage…So, they can’t even cheat properly?
oldcobrokemyheartbycheating says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 13:20
Anybody know if we can can send season tickets back to relevant clubs early? no interests in attending more games, don’t want dosh back either. Just feel this is only way I can make my most miniscule of statements.
___________________________________________
Royal Mail will be happy to offer that facility for the price of a stamp.
Corruption… not surprising. However it does not make me feel less of a Celtic man. In fact it made me think about my father and his father and the defiance they would have shown by being more Celtic than ever.
let the people sing even louder…hail hail
A look through FIFA’s regulations on player registration is thus…
A player is deemed properly registered to play professional football for the club and under FIFA’s regulations when all regestration ducumentation has been correctly completed and submitted to the relevent member association..AND….AND all details of contractual payments to that player are provided along with his registration documentation…
So according to FIFA….they were illigitimatley registered and thus ineligable to play.
The sporting advantage quoted by LNS is an opinion which fly’s in the face of FIFA’s own regulations….which the SFA are bound by in their membership of FIFA..Sporting advantage is the issue!
Unfortunatley FIFA also within those regulations state that any punishment for a breach of the above registration is at the discretion of the member association….
Which leaves us with the only course of action left…a member club or European club would need to lodge a complaint regarding the result of a game to their member association or UEFA depending on who the club is…
The main flaw in the verdict is once again by focussing in on the fine detail LNS has missed the spirit of the law or the footballing rules.
The rule requesting full disclosure of payments, or potentially suffer ineligibility, is there to stop people being paid in brown envelopes or by asian gambling syndcates and the like.
Is LNS saying that if a player was found to be in receipt, via a club, of an unregistered third party payment from a company called Webetyougetsentoff, the player would still be eligible for the rest of the season until the registration was revoked.
Presumably the revocation process, if indeed there is one, takes its time and is subject to appeal.
And that leads to another question is there actually a registration revocation process within the rules of the SFA and SPL???
If not then how is any player ever deemed to be inelligible?
To be honest, if some people with initiative set up an alternative Scottish football body – based on financial and sporting fair play – I wonder how many clubs and their supporters would join?
And if Celtic petitioned UEFA to join a different national league based on a complaint that Scottish football has failed to govern itself they might get a sympathetic hearing. I wouldn’t blame Celtic, or any other club if they went into sporting exile in the wake of this.
schottie59 says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 13:37
Aye but what would your father and his father say, when the leaders of the club sit on the boards that oversee the “corruption”?
I think the irony is that Rangers did not die at all – despite incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Dinosaur-like, the message may never reach the brain.
However Scottish Football died today at least in its former guise as a sport, because the SPL has just given them a green light to do it all over again. In the circumstances they are in, who would bet against that happening?
Another delicious irony. The draft 5-way agreement required Sevco to agree that six of Rangers titles should be erased? LNS thinks not.
It is an academic point with no added value, but what impact did the implicit threats have in the “direction” of the verdict?
The coach and horses, predicted by Paul McBride, that could be driven through the SFA/SPL articles of association, has just passed by. On board were 5 SPL titles and several Scottish Cups.
Improperly registered but eligible to play because no mandate to backdate ineligibility if registrations not revoked ahead of a breach being proved.
So although guilty you’re not guilty ‘cos you weren’t found guilty before anyone knew you were guilty.
FFS.
Doncaster & Regan out.
Incompetents.
paulmac2 says:
Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 13:40
I need to head out but if you have time are you able to see how the SFA or SPL actually revokes a registration.