The following post comes about as a result of the research and work put in by Auldheid.
He has drafted the submission to FIFA detailed below after closely looking at their rules, and taking on board the points contained in the Glasnost “Golden Rule” blog. TSFM has attached the blog’s name to the report since the overwhelming – but not unanimous – view of our readership is that the SFA and the SPL have again gotten themselves into an almighty and embarrassingly amateur fankle over this issue.
We believe that tens of thousands of football fans will be lost to the game if the outcome of the LNS enquiry is not perceived to be commensurate with the scope and extent of the rule breaking that LNS found had taken place. In view of this, we believe that we have to do what we can to explore all possibilities for justice for those who love the game so much and yet are utterly disillusioned by recent events.
LNS is not being questioned here. He has found that RFC were guilty as charged by the SPL.
What is being questioned is the SFA’s crucial – and seemingly conflicted – role in the LNS enquiry, as is the effectiveness of LNS’s recommended sanction as either a deterrent or an upholder of sporting integrity.
It came to our notice last week that FIFA have created a web site at
https://www.bkms-system.net/bkwebanon/report/clientInfo?cin=6fifa61&language=eng
that tells us that FIFA have implemented a regulatory framework which is intended to ensure that all statutory rules, rules of conduct and internal guidelines of FIFA are respected and complied with.
In support of that regulatory framework FIFA have set up the above site as a reporting mechanism by means of which inappropriate behaviour and infringements of the pertinent regulations may be reported.
FIFA say that their jurisdiction encompasses misconduct that (1) relates to match manipulation; (2) occurs in or affects more than one confederation, so that it cannot adequately be addressed by a single confederation; or (3) would ordinarily be addressed by a confederation or association, but, under the particular facts at issue, has not been or is unlikely to be dealt with appropriately at that level.
Discussions arising from the previous blog on TSFM, “Gilt Edged Justice”, which was published after Lord Nimmo Smith (LNS) ruled on the registration of Rangers players who had contractual side letters that were not disclosed to the SFA as part of their registration, suggest that there may be possible unfortunate consequences for football arising from the evidence presented by the SFA to the LNS enquiry that informed its findings on registration and consequent eligibility. There is also a question of the propriety of the SFA providing evidence on an issue which could have had a negative impact on them had it been found that they had failed to carrying out their registration duties with due rigour over a period of ten years when the existence of EBTs was known to officials within the SFA.
On the basis that the LNS findings require that registration rules be clarified by FIFA and rewritten globally if necessary to remove any ambiguity and under clause 3 above, this appears to be an issue that the FIFA should examine and that the SFA cannot address.
The following report has therefore been submitted by TSFM on behalf of its readers to FIFA drawing on the content and debate following the “Gilt Edged Justice” blog in respect of the possible footballing consequences of the LNS enquiry.
The hope is that by speaking for so many supporters, FIFA will give the TSFM submission some weight, but individuals are free of course to make their own points in their own way. We await acknowledgement of the submission.
The report Submitted to FIFA is as follows;
This report was prepared on behalf of the 10,000-strong readership of The Scottish Football Monitor at http://scottishfootballmonitor.wordpress.com/
It is our belief that FIFA general rules of conduct were breached by the SFA and their employees in both creating and then advising The Lord Nimmo Smith (LNS) enquiry into the non disclosure of full payment information to the Scottish Football Association (SFA) by Rangers F.C during a period of player registration over 10 years from 2000.We believe that although the issue has been addressed by the SFA the particular facts at issue suggest that it has not been dealt with appropriately and we therefore ask FIFA to investigate. The facts at issue are that the process and advice given failed to uphold sporting integrity, and that a conflict of interest was at play.
We believe the advice provided and the enquiry set up, where SFA both advised and is the appellant body, breaches not only the integrity the registration rules were intended to uphold, but also totally undermines the integrity of the SFA in breach of General Conduct rules 1, 2 and 4. (See below.)
1. Firstly we believe that the advice supplied to LNS that an incorrectly registered player was eligible to play as long as the registration was accepted by the SFA however unwittingly, undermines the intent of the SPL/SFA rules on player registration and so undermines the integrity of football in three ways.
• It incentivises clubs to apply for a player to be registered even if they know that the conditions of registration are not satisfied, in the hope that the application will somehow ‘slip through the net’ and be granted anyway (in which case it will be valid until revoked).
• A club which discovers that it has made an error in its application is incentivized to say nothing and to ‘let sleeping dogs lie’ – because it would be in a better position by not confessing its mistake.
• And most importantly, it incentivises fraud. By deliberately concealing relevant information, a club can ensure that a player who does not satisfy the registration conditions is treated as being eligible – and therefore allowed to play – for as long as a period as possible (potentially his entire spell with the club). Then, if the club is no longer around when the deception is finally discovered, imposing meaningful sanctions may be impossible.
2. Secondly we believe the process followed was inappropriate due to a Conflict of Interest. Had the LNS enquiry not ruled on the basis of advice supplied by The SFA, they and those persons advising the LNS enquiry, could have been subjected to censure and the SFA to potential compensation claims had LNS found that the players were indeed ineligible to play and results then been annulled as was SFA practice when an ineligible player played.
3. Finally we contend that a law should not be applied according to its literal meaning if to do so would lead to an absurdity or a manifest injustice or in this case loss of football integrity.
See http://glasnostandapairofstrikers.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/gilt-edged-justice/4. We therefore ask FIFA to investigate both the process used and advice given to Lord Nimmo Smith to satisfy themselves that FIFA’s intentions with regard to upholding the integrity of football under FIFA rules have not been seriously damaged by the LNS findings and also to reassure Scottish football supporters that the integrity of our game has not been sacrificed by the very authority in whose care it has been placed to promote the short term cause of commercialism to the games long term detriment.
General Rules of Conduct (These are taken from the FIFA web site itself and can be found as part of completing the submission process)
1. Persons bound by this Code are expected to be aware of the importance of their duties and concomitant obligations and responsibilities.
2. Persons bound by this Code are obliged to respect all applicable laws and regulations as well as FIFA’s regulatory framework to the extent applicable to them.
3. N/A
4. Persons bound by this Code may not abuse their position in any way, especially to take advantage of their position for private aims or gains.
AND THE PENNY DROPS!!! 🙂
Daily Record website gives prominence and a photo to a big breaking story of the day “Former Celtic star Paul Hartley: Title races are boring if you want real drama then bring back the Old Firm”
Meanwhile, in smaller print, less prominent on the page (in fact as un-prominent as it gets), no photo, a story with no news value whatsoever “Francisco Sandaza set to fight sacking after Rangers terminate his contract over hoax phone call”
goosygoosy says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 18:12
3 0 Rate This
Didnt catch the actual interview last night on BBC Scotland but managed to read the “audio text” on my screen of Longmuir angling for a job at Ibrox
Did anyone tape this piece?
——–
He was on SSB and Sportsound yesterday, both MP3 podcasts are available from the respective websites 😉
I’ve read the rumours about the financial reality beginning to kick in at Ibrox but this is something I’ve never been able to understand in this whole affair.
What is in this for the venture capitalists involved in Green’s consortium?
How will they make any money on this?
Will they make it by turning round a football club and then selling it on to someone who can take it to the mythical ‘next level’?
This is not a club in an attractive league. There is no guaranteed massive income from TV. Sponsorship also has its limitations. European income is becoming more and more difficult to secure.
How much would someone be willing to pay for a soundly run club but with little or no prospects of ever making a profit?
Remember the club plays in the backwater that is Scotland.
Is it the plan to syphon off the share money in dividends and part of each year’s season ticket money to the original investors?
If this was the plan all along then why continue to lose £1M a month trying to keep up a pretence?
Even ‘The Rangers’ fans will see through this in time particularly when a summer comes and goes with no big signings. How many fans will pay the increased cost of a season ticket and, if they don’t, how does this affect the business model and more importantly the consortiums business plan.
Forget the idea that these guys are Rangers men with an emotional tie as an excuse to lose money. They are business men first, second and last and they want a return.
Will they sell the club out from under RIFC, take the profit for themselves, and then liquidate?
But surely that is fraught with difficulty in a plc.
If these guys were playing the stock market they could have made far more than they will ever make on ‘The Rangers’.
I just don’t get how these guys get their money back and I would be grateful if anyone could enlighten me.
just seen chris Graham on bbc scotland
according to this balloon the focus should not be on Rangers or Sandaza parts in this but all the focus should be on the hoaxer
Andy says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 18:58
just seen chris Graham on bbc scotland
according to this balloon the focus should not be on Rangers or Sandaza parts in this but all the focus should be on the hoaxer
———————————————————
That’s a bit strong, it’s not been conclusively proved yet that CG IS hoaxing them
justshatered says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 18:57
easiest way i see it is to sell the club to someone and keep the assets
like ibrox and rent it back to them
TW (@tartanwulver) says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 19:07
0 0 Rate This
Andy says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 18:58
just seen chris Graham on bbc scotland
according to this balloon the focus should not be on Rangers or Sandaza parts in this but all the focus should be on the hoaxer
———————————————————
That’s a bit strong, it’s not been conclusively proved yet that CG IS hoaxing them
_______
as usual the follow followers wont find that out untill its too late
Andy says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 18:58
1 0 Rate This
just seen chris Graham on bbc scotland
according to this balloon the focus should not be on Rangers or Sandaza parts in this but all the focus should be on the hoaxer …
———–
I believe he was the one speaking on Radio Scotland’s Sportsound tonight, too. Didn’t sound at all like his twitter profile photo, but then again, voices can deceive 🙂
Bravo to Sportsound for a bit of Web Talk. I’ve long thought there should be a weekly review programme about internet blogs, twitter, and the like, in much the same way as Paper Talk does for the old media.
justshatered says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 18:57
The institutional investors have had me baffled all along. I thought at first it might not be a bad deal that’ll collect a bit of profit in a few years time…..but 17.5m for 35% of the club, it makes no sense in terms of risk v reward.
justshatered says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 18:57
Will they sell the club out from under RIFC, take the profit for themselves, and then liquidate?
But surely that is fraught with difficulty in a plc.
============
You must remember that all the property and what’s left of the cash is held by RIFC. TRFC have nothing except the players and a football business losing over £1m every month. RIFC are lending that £1m a month to TRFC, and are probably charging them rent for using the properties.
That means that RIFC can sell TRFC any time they like, or put it into liquidation if they can’t find a buyer. Then RIFC are left with the properties, and no troublesome, loss making football business to worry about.
There is no chance of RIFC going into liquidation. The Directors of RIFC have a duty to their shareholders, so they will dump TRFC long before that happens.
neepheid says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 19:42
1 0 Rate This
justshatered says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 18:57
Will they sell the club out from under RIFC, take the profit for themselves, and then liquidate?
But surely that is fraught with difficulty in a plc.
============
You must remember that all the property and what’s left of the cash is held by RIFC. TRFC have nothing except the players and a football business losing over £1m every month. RIFC are lending that £1m a month to TRFC, and are probably charging them rent for using the properties.
That means that RIFC can sell TRFC any time they like, or put it into liquidation if they can’t find a buyer. Then RIFC are left with the properties, and no troublesome, loss making football business to worry about.
There is no chance of RIFC going into liquidation. The Directors of RIFC have a duty to their shareholders, so they will dump TRFC long before that happens.
———
Isn’t what you describe above very similar to the current Coventry scenario?
donsman33 says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 13:43
43 4 Rate This
Just been reading up on the goings on in North Korea and can’t
help but see the similarities with The Rangers:
1) A loud mouth leader who likes to think they are more
important than they actually are.
2) An inhouse media that pumps out propoganda that keeps the peepils in the dark about whats actually going on.
3) A large population/support and this is the only real strength
that they really do have.
4) not got a lot of cash.
5) they actually believe they are the most sucsessfull club/country in the world
6) the rest of the world openly laughs about them.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
At the risk of starting GreenockJack off again, North Korea does at least have a nuclear capability. The Rangers can do no more than shout from the ramparts.
Danish Pastry says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 19:52
Isn’t what you describe above very similar to the current Coventry scenario?
======
I have tried to make sense of the Coventry situation by reading the BBC website articles, but sorry, I failed. The standard of journalism is abysmal, as usual. Try this one–
The Coventry spokesman added: “This is merely a property subsidiary which owns no material assets and has no employees, on or off the pitch.”
Now what kind of property subsidiary owns no material assets? Yet this nonsense is reported verbatim, no questions asked. Reminds me of the reporting in another football administration last year!
Lord Wobbly says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 19:58
1 0 Rate This
At the risk of starting GreenockJack off again, North Korea does at least have a nuclear capability. The Rangers can do no more than shout from the ramparts.
————
I think a few people are still seriously miffed that there’s no nuclear option, regarding The Rangers!
doubt Sandaza’s current Agent was fighting his corner at any hearing now or in the future. On the subject of him being useless at Sevco is it not the case that he was out injured with broken cheekbone for quite a period having put his head where many wouldn’t.
neepheid says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 20:08
1 0 Rate This
Danish Pastry says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 19:52
Isn’t what you describe above very similar to the current Coventry scenario?
======
I have tried to make sense of the Coventry situation by reading the BBC website articles, but sorry, I failed. The standard of journalism is abysmal, as usual. Try this one–
The Coventry spokesman added: “This is merely a property subsidiary which owns no material assets and has no employees, on or off the pitch.”
Now what kind of property subsidiary owns no material assets? Yet this nonsense is reported verbatim, no questions asked. Reminds me of the reporting in another football administration last year!
——–
I was trying to make sense of it the other day, since it’s now Steven Pressley’s club, and it sounded very much like they were trying to separate the club from the business running the club. In all my days I’ve never thought of a club as anything other than a single entity. It’s a clever way of stiffing your creditors while still keeping the club running, debt free. It sounds familiar to me …
neepheid says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 20:08
———————————————————————–
To be (perhaps excessively) fair to football hacks, there are no end of people supposedly in the financial know who have been duped by money men with more company names than morals.
Not that that excuses the incredible and shameful lack of curiosity and capacity for original thought that most news outlets (even reputable ones) have demonstrated, and continue to demonstrate.
Danish Pastry says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 20:09
0 0 Rate This
Lord Wobbly says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 19:58
1 0 Rate This
At the risk of starting GreenockJack off again, North Korea does at least have a nuclear capability. The Rangers can do no more than shout from the ramparts.
————
I think a few people are still seriously miffed that there’s no
nuclear option, regarding The Rangers!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Is an explosion of such magnitude really required when an implosion can be every bit as devastating? 😀
If I were a The Rangers fan I’d be asking Charles what he is going to do to stop the company/club losing £1m per month and what will happen if they can’t drastically cut their outgoings, aside from sacking a few employees. I’d also like to know if he presented the SFA with some sort of business plan in order to get a club license and if so…. well, I’d just love to see it.
The fans really need to waken up and start questioning how their money is being spent or the same thing is going to happen to them and Scottish football again. If it did I’d find it hard to have any sympathy for them.
Another legal bill winging its way over to Govan…they won’t be happy ! 🙂
==========================================================
“Rangers hit with SFA legal bill over player dispute
By Chris McLaughlinSenior Football Reporter, BBC Scotland
Rangers are facing a legal bill after a Scottish FA panel judged they should pay the expenses of five former players they were in contract disputes with.
Sone Aluko, Kyle Lafferty, Steven Naismith, Jamie Ness and Allan McGregor all quit the club when it was placed into liquidation last year.
The players refused to transfer their contracts from the old company to the new one, which the club challenged.
The SFA insists Rangers should pay all legal bills relating to the dispute.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22035246
Lord Wobbly says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 20:23
1 0 Rate This
Is an explosion of such magnitude really required when an implosion can be every bit as devastating?
———-
Aye, they say a black hole follows an artificially bright supernova.
Danish Pastry says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 20:09
I think a few people are still seriously miffed that there’s no nuclear option, regarding The Rangers!
————————————————–
Mind you, that depends on the definition of ‘nuclear option’. If it means one mega-blast that changes everything is an instant, it looks like no. If it means a low-grade contamination that causes initial devastation over the affected area, continues to lay waste to it over many subsequent years, and prevents proper growth from being established even after that, then perhaps it is yes.
incredibleadamspark says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 20:24
I would also be asking him what he was going to do to substantially increase the income streams. The Rangers model was seriously flawed before, I see little different now. Other than potentially getting income from stadium naming rights and that is not going to be a particularly substantial sum.
The business was loss making before, it seems to be loss making now, how is he going to change that. Unless they can raise the income level by a significant amount they will not even be able to get back to the levels they were before (and that lost £10m a year without Europe).
I have seen nothing so far to suggest that he has achieved anything. Other than an IPO, based on gratuitous alienation, with the assets being held by the PLC and as such protecting the investors and not the club.
So far Charles Green has performed no better than Craig Whyte in my opinion. He has however managed the fans much more effectively.
Out of curiosity, does anyone know if a club’s participation in a Scottish League can be blocked — e.g. at the start of a season – due to outstanding payments to the SFA ?
A hypothetical question perhaps, but I would guess in the licensing rulebook, [I know !], there would be an ultimate threat from the SFA if a club simply refuses to pay up ?
StevieBC
Well at least they can’t pull the oldco/newco card on this one 🙂 this is absolutely cg’s gig 🙂
TW (@tartanwulver) says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 20:53
1 0 Rate This
Danish Pastry says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 20:09
I think a few people are still seriously miffed that there’s no nuclear option, regarding The Rangers!
————————————————–
Mind you, that depends on the definition of ‘nuclear option’. If it means one mega-blast that changes everything is an instant, it looks like no. If it means a low-grade contamination that causes initial devastation over the affected area, continues to lay waste to it over many subsequent years, and prevents proper growth from being established even after that, then perhaps it is yes.
———–
Sounds a bit Chernobyl to me – and oddly enough, the Souness era began in April 1986. A radioactive coincidence!
StevieBC says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 20:56
If there is a rule to cover such an outcome it shall be written as follows;
Any team that has not cleared any outstanding debts to the SFA prior to the start of any season shall be barred from competing in any league administered by the SFA. Dispensation may be granted in special cases where the participation of a team in deemed necessary for the good of the league. A special hearing will be held and attended by senior members of the SFA and their decision will be final. Disclosure of the details of any meeting and how it came to its decision will not be made public.
briggsbhoy says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 21:07
In short.
We can do what we want, we can ignore the rules, we won’t explain it to the fans.
Regarding Coventry’s admin, have tRangers not provided every debt dodging, tax evading, calamitously run football club a road map to survival? I did not think there could be a more amoral scam than pre-packed Admin….but tRangers have plumbed new depths, and lots of clubs will be watching carefully.
chipm0nk says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 21:10
Exactly you might refer to it as Flexibility to Suit
chipm0nk says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 20:55
incredibleadamspark says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 20:24
I would also be asking him what he was going to do to substantially increase the income streams.
—————————————————————————————————–
Meanwhile, over on RM they are complaining about £13 being taken out of their bank accounts to cover the Linfield game.
Not another boycott shirley? 🙂
Is Charlie taking a greater risk by ‘firing’ a player / Sandaza ?
One view is that Charlie has been opportunistic in cutting costs by getting rid of Sandaza – and others recently.
However, is there more risk associated with chasing a player out of the door – on possibly spurious grounds ?
Assuming worst case scenario for TRFC, if Sandaza is found to have been mistreated, then presumably TRFC will be liable for a financial settlement.
However, could there be a more damaging threat e.g. from the football authorities ?
[OK, another hypothetical scenario…]
If a player has been found to have been mistreated by a member club, then would the SFA, [or SFL ?], be obligated to apply their own punishment… like another transfer embargo ? 😉
Now that would be funny.
iamacant says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 21:21
Meanwhile, over on RM they are complaining about £13 being taken out of their bank accounts to cover the Linfield game.
Not another boycott shirley? 🙂
…………………………………………………………………
If they are taking 13quid out of all 34? thousand season ticket holders accounts can they claim the biggest crowd ever for two minnows playing a friendly?
Arabest 21.14…
………
They didn’t survive
StevieBC says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 20:44
11 0 Rate This
Another legal bill winging its way over to Govan…they won’t be happy !
==========================================================
“Rangers hit with SFA legal bill over player dispute
———————————————————————————————————–
might this be the ruling that FINALLY clears up the new club/same club argument?
Sevco have also sacked their stadium announcer – from Clyde SSB and various twitterati folk
D&P will be disgusted, they managed to punt only 4 folk whilst in admin!
NTHM @ 21:38
Let’s just sit back and wait 🙂 could karma be coming to bite them on the ass? AMcC has been extremely quiet of late………. Maybe he’s in a wee huff? Or maybe he’s thinking he’ll be the next out the door, after the linfield game of course 🙂
iamacant says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 21:21
3 0 Rate This
chipm0nk says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 20:55
incredibleadamspark says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 20:24
I would also be asking him what he was going to do to substantially increase the income streams.
—————————————————————————————————–
Meanwhile, over on RM they are complaining about £13 being taken out of their bank accounts to cover the Linfield game.
Not another boycott shirley?
———-
Is that legal? I mean you can’t just debit people because you happen to have their bank details. Crivvens.
Its not the direct debits that are complaining ,its the freebies .
Danish Pastry says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 21:48
It happens at lots of clubs for cup games, never heard of this being done for a friendly. I bet they’re using the same clause in the small print though. Sounds a bit desperate.
Apparently when people signed up for cup games not already on the season ticket they agreed to take home friendlies as well. So the money is automatically debited. However if they email the club they can have a refund.
It’s quite clever, how many will bother for the £13, even if they choose not to actually go.
Some thoughts on the Current Football Legislation and its implementation—- and the board and support of Celtic Football club.
The 33rd President of the United States and his lesson for Celtic Football Club and Alex Salmond.
http://wp.me/p1G95H-Td
Please note, that whilst I am a Celtic fan, much of what I say here relates to all football fans.
The legislation and the way it is interpreted is a disgrace and there will be many a day in court before it is recognised as wholly unworkable in its present form and under the present attitude of many.
I have no idea if the act will be changed but what needs to change is the mentality under which– the issue that the act seeks to redress is viewed.
Further, the clubs– all clubs— need to stand up and be counted when it comes to the fan– the fan is more than the paying customer, more than the season book holder, more than a shareholder or financial investor.
Football and football support is all about good decent honest people and the legislation, Government, the authorities and the clubs themselves should treat them as such.
see the link at Auldheid 14:28 rangersrants
notwithstanding the understandable same club oldco/newco nonsense this is a sensible and heartfelt blog by, what looks like, a true rangers fan
might be interesting to invite this guy to give his thoughts on how he sees the next few years for rangers (i know) in a guest blog…
and also to give him some respect if he did so…
i thought it was a very impressive laying out of his view at present and would be happy to meet more rangers supporters like him who are not swallowing the rabble rousing nonsense pedalled by [Green]…unfortunately i have yet to meet any yet…
give this guy a platform?
chipm0nk says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 20:55
incredibleadamspark says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 20:24
I would also be asking him what he was going to do to substantially increase the income streams.
========================================
Isn’t it only 2-3 weeks since their financial director was given an unchallenged platform in the Herald to announce that increasing turnover to £100M+ in the medium term would be easily achievable?
Fraser Wishart must be on holiday.
What will he do, help the player or side with sevco.
neepheid says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 19:42
I also think that RIFC is loaning £1M a month to TRFC however they are never going to get this money back. So why lose £1M a month.
This is also baffling. Why, if you are such a good venture capitalist, blow £1M a month that you could just as easily hoover up with a bonus.
I also think that RIFC will be charging a high interest rate however if the assets are now with RIFC then when TRFC goes bust the assets will remain untouched so again why blow £1M a month.
Is there something else going on here or are they really just poor businessmen.
chipm0nk says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 22:03
2 0 Rate This
Apparently when people signed up for cup games not already on the season ticket they agreed to take home friendlies as well. So the money is automatically debited. However if they email the club they can have a refund.
It’s quite clever, how many will bother for the £13, even if they choose not to actually go.
—————————————————————————————
nope, not true
none of the CCCS (continuous credit card scheme) options include friendlies – or they didn’t when the renewal forms were sent out.
Seems charlie changed the rules mid season – so punters didn’t know what they were paying for that season
He has changed the rules
Another astounding moment in hypocrisy from the dear leader
Potential for yet another ‘Downfall’ parody video…
I have visions of Charlie, [Hitler], being reliably informed by his assembled underlings in the Ibrox Blue Room;
“…erm…we have received…eh…yet another…erm… legal bill to pay, Mein Fuhrer…” 🙁
Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 22:04
Further, the clubs– all clubs— need to stand up and be counted when it comes to the fan– the fan is more than the paying customer, more than the season book holder, more than a shareholder or financial investor.
===============================================
Over the summer I am sure the SFA received much correspondence from fans regarding concerns over the Rangers situation. Much would no doubt have been bordering on offensive or abusive and was probably rightly ignored. On the other hand though much would have been well written and polite – I myself wrote to the SFA on two occasions in this manner, and I have yet to receive any reply. Gathering information since last summer it appears all well written and polite communications to the SFA from ordinary fans were ignored. I believe this is an utterly contemptuous way to treat people who invest so much in game.
upthehoops says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 22:16
I know the feeling my friend. What about a ‘strong letter’ writing offensive with some clout? I don’t even know what that means but maybe our more erudite contributers could advise!!
These sackings remind me of Alan Partridge’s meeting with employees of his production company. Rather than admit the business was failing and deal with the reality professionally, he panics and starts sacking people for tutting and leaving empty coffee cups on the desk. By that standard, McCoist was lucky to get away with Tracksuitgate.
Sorry to mock but the spivs are mocking us all and it’s farcical.
abigboydiditandranaway says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 22:06
Absolutely.
If anyone is prepared to put reasonable points forward in a reasonable manner then that is to be encouraged. It can only help the debate.
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 22:11
Thanks for clearing that up. I was under the impression people had signed up to that, even if it was in the small print and they didn’t realise they were doing it.
The way you describe it sounds like a fraud (or theft) to me. I wonder if any of the victims will report this to the relevant authorities.
Danish Pastry says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 18:55
goosygoosy says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 18:12
3 0 Rate This
Didnt catch the actual interview last night on BBC Scotland but managed to read the “audio text” on my screen of Longmuir angling for a job at Ibrox
Did anyone tape this piece?
——–
He was on SSB and Sportsound yesterday, both MP3 podcasts are available from the respective websites
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Thanks Danish
A few posters this evening again wondering, quite rightly, how the Sevco flotation works for the investors who bought in, and how they can make a profit. Another (to me at least) massive conundrum is the total silence from Ticketus. Now, they been stiffed for £18m, without it seeing to cause them any public concern. What the blazes is going on? Who can afford to lose that much money, and not be going mental at how they’ve been shafted.
Anyone?*
* obviously a rehetorical question, although I’m sure the MSM are digging away even as we speak. Or tap.
Many people pooh pooh SSB but it is one of the only places the Sevco apologists can be challenged.
Caught a wee bit earlier tonight and as there was a fair bit of discussion on reconstruction and leg ups etc Andy Walker played a blinder asking Derek Johnstone how much he thought T’Rangers would have to pay out to be competitive with Celtic in the SPL.
Still waiting on the answer as far as I know. And that is the problem for T’Rangers fans – they know, despite all the talk of wanting to climb their way back, where they want to be but the reality is they know they can’t afford it.
Get back too quick and running a sustainable ship they will be also-rans. Try to reach for the stars and be top dog they know they will be back in hock like before.
However the longer it takes to get back the more chance of people walking away and the less chance of gaining the revenue required to get back to the top.
I may be wrong but I don’t think Charles Green is the one to steer the good ship T’Rangers through such choppy waters.
If he does manage it then I will gladly say he is the best CEO in the land.
Craig Whyte saying he was behind Charles Green all the time?
http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4873936/Green-played-up-front-for-me.html
Its not April 1 again. Groundhog Day???
http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4873936/Green-played-up-front-for-me.html
greenockjack says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 23:59
0 3 Rate This
LW says
At the risk of starting GreenockJack off again, North Korea does at least have a nuclear capability. The Rangers can do no more than shout from the ramparts.
————————————————————————
Wobbly old chap !
I see you are missing me and obviously still troubled by the lack of nuclear fallout over at Ibrox.
I like to think of Barcabhoy playing the part of Tony Blair,
standing up before the keyboard and gravely warning the RTC
blog of the nuclear threat and just like Tony´s Nuke´s, they´ve
never been found or has the man himself been held accountable.
In the propaganda wars of last summer, it was a clever trick and on this blog, a valid issue to have raised.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You continue to give Barcabhoy far too much credit. Rangers would have died regardless. Rangers demise was 99% self-inflicted (I’m prepared to give RTC, Phil and one or two others the credit for the other 1%….and 99% of RTC’s input was crap 😀 ).
Where do you stand on Charles Green as Kim Jong-un (a despot dictator who replaced a despot dictator)?
Green: I shafted Whyte to get Gers
Bombshell as ex-chief in £50m bid for club
Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/scottishnews/4873912/Green-I-shafted-Whyte-to-get-Gers.html#ixzz2PXesgzvv
Robert Coyle says:
Friday, April 5, 2013 at 00:54
Bloody hell. What a shower of spivs and ne’erdo wells to be in charge of part of the social fabric of Scotland.
http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/
news/4873936/Green-played-up-front-for-me.html
or
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/
scottishnews/4873912/Green-I-shafted-Whyte-to-get-
Gers.html#ixzz2PXesgzvv
You decide.
But of course it’s all a distraction. We’ve all been fecked. You, me, Rangers fans, The Rangers fans, Scottish football, all of of us have been played… so that SDM, then Whyte then Green (and assorted others) could line their pockets.
It’s (long overdue) time that we either take back the game for the fans or else gave it up (altogether) as a bad joke.
Auldheid (@Auldheid) says:
Friday, April 5, 2013 at 01:10
Yip and still they are going to try and place them in a division higher than what they deserve to be in.
As for the articles,craig whyte no longer needs his tape recordings,charles green just gave him a front page signed confession lol.Craig whyte was/is/will be the owner of the new rangers(formally known as sevco).
StevieBC says:
Wednesday, April 3, 2013 at 22:23
liveinhop says:
Wednesday, April 3, 2013 at 22:16
Rumour is the Sun won’t be running Whyte tomorrow in the paper they have dropped it
=====================================================================
If true, then can we expect an ‘Exclusive’ about TRFC in the Sun instead ?
===============================================================
So has the Sun played a good game then ?
They apparently had ‘Exclusive’ lies/a version of the truth from Whyte on Wednesday, and then presumably the paper approached Green.
Green offers his own lies/a version the truth and The Sun agrees to drop the story for Thursday.
But now Friday’s Sun has not just one – but two ‘Exclusives’ !
But which spiv is telling the truth – or as near to the truth as they can get…? 🙄
Now Green just has to ban The Sun from Ibrox to confirm that he himself has been ‘played’ ?
TW (@tartanwulver) says:
Thursday, April 4, 2013 at 20:53
Do we not have #Charlote18
StevieBC
My take on it would be that CW went to the Sun with his tape recorder and the Sun then went to CG with what they had and gave CG 24 hrs to come up with a story and hey presto a spiv fight .
I would say I feel sorry for the sevco fans but CGs new club is an abomination of the even the old club so I can’t wish their new club well .
Maybe now they will unite and attempt to create an new club based on moral and honest grounds .
Accept that they are following a new club that they can shape into something that they can be proud of and try to build into a honest competitive club playing by the rules and leave all the rotten baggage and animosity behind them
IMO it’s the only route left for the fans .
Also ,do the sevco fans really want to be run by a man who says .
” maybe Imran promised him three Russian women ,I don’t know and I don’t care ” a truly disgusting statement from a man in his position IMO
Robert Coyle says:
Friday, April 5, 2013 at 01:34
13 0 Rate This
Auldheid (@Auldheid) says:
Friday, April 5, 2013 at 01:10
Yip and still they are going to try and place them in a division higher than what they deserve to be in.
As for the articles,craig whyte no longer needs his tape recordings,charles green just gave him a front page signed confession lol.Craig whyte was/is/will be the owner of the new rangers(formally known as sevco).
————-
Certainly seems like that. The last bit in the Whyte article is puzzling, especially where Green admits that if the CVA failed the shares would revert to Whyte & Co.
Cue Bomber Brown, surely he can now reveal what it is Green told him?
On the other hand, this is The Sun. Caution advised 🙂
On the Dunfermline story, since Gavin Masterton has handed over his shares to the Pars’ administrator, it would good to know if there were similar strings attached.
Surely these latest revelations once again call into serious question the SFA licensing process last summer:
What steps were taken to ensure Charles was a “fit & proper” person
What was produced to convince the SFA that the new club were financially viable?
Has Green just admitted in a national newspaper that he deliberately misled and concealed the facts from the SFA/SPL/SFL throughout the whole process…
Correct me if I am wrong but Green has just admitted fronting for Whyte …that will be the bold Craigy boy to whom the SFA dished out lifetime ban from Scottish football…..
…how much worse does this stench from this whole mess have to get before someone calls time on this corruption…..
Perish the thought, Mr Longmuir, that Mr Green is simply telling you anything you want to hear just to keep you sweet.
Long Time Lurker says:
Friday, April 5, 2013 at 06:41
Do we not have #Charlote18
————————————————-
To continue the analogy, if it is the nuclear option, it is maybe concealed somewhere in a hidden bunker waiting to be fired. But will it be?
So the Sun have started a Spiv fight.i’d bet the spivs are perfectly happy with that,It’s getting near the time to bail out with the spoils and leave Sevco/TRFC to the next set of vultures.
We were informed by Corsica that Whyte,Green & Ellis met in Switzerland.Just before Xmas they met in the Bulgari Hotel in London.
They’re now sitting with the IPO cash,the property assets,and anything else the oldco owned.They just need next years ST money to boost their coffers then they’re gone,leaving TRFC as a shell with no ground,no assets,no cash..they could liquidate but they’ll probably sell the club for a £1 or so to some self made billionaire,claiming they did actually save it.
Suit followed by counter suit.the same tactics employed by Ellis,Whyte etc when they first took control.did any of these suits ever happen?.
Of course not.It’s the deflecting tactic whilst the spivs prepare their final departure.
RIFC,a PLC with the directors legally bound to act in the best interest of its shareholders should now,I suppose put cast TRFC adrift.They will argue that by removing TRFC they’ve protected the fans who invested their savings.
There’s 65m shares issued with about 7m owned by fans.The price right now is around the issue price of 70p.
That leaves 58m worth approx £40m,probably a reasonable value if there is £21m in the bank and the property assets.
Get out now and the fans get their money back,Green,Stockbridge etc all walk away with a fortune as they got their shares for 1p.
Green etc,remember,are tied to RIFC,not TRFC,for 12 months.Some of the other “institutional” investors,are only in for 6 and that time is only a few weeks away.
Are audited accounts not due soon also?.
Power without responsibility -the prerogative of the (C)harlot(te18) throughout the ages
Does anyone at the SFA actually know who owns “Rangers”?
Does anyone care?
Or are they simply too afraid to ask?
So if I get this right the past owner of Rangers and the present CEO of T’Rangers were both trying to dupe each other, sharing sensitive financial information, telling porkies, trying to work the best possible deal for themsleves and during this process some of the conversations were being covertly taped and now that information has gone public.
I think if you ask Mr Sandaza, down Ibrox way, that type of behaviour gets tagged as a sacking offense by the Chief Executive Officer.
Oh the irony!