Fair Play at FIFA?

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.

This entry was posted in General by Trisidium. Bookmark the permalink.
Tom Byrne

About Trisidium

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

4,057 thoughts on “Fair Play at FIFA?


  1. With the current spat between the spivs – is this an opportunity for the SFA to prepare its defence wrt accommodating TRFC?

    Regan could come out of the bunker – deliver a few ‘concerned’ soundbites and imply that he was ‘duped’ by Green. He could then scurry back to the bunker to continue playing dominoes with Ogilvie. 😉

    The SFA could spin that they are victims too, (!), and just in time before the next iBrox implosion.


  2. Apologies forgot to add ,Allies 10m warchest can kick in from the 1/9/13am ,rules are rules ,he is entitled to spend,go for it Ally.


  3. On the Whyte V Green

    Confucius said – Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves


  4. I wonder if TRFC will give Cammy Bell access to training facilities till september, well after all he’ll have been out of the game for about 5 months by the time he starts.
    Or maybe CG will charge him for it, & gym time too?
    Or maybe an EBT till first pay day? Or a pay day loan at favourable (to CG) interest rates?

    I’m still gnawing away at this ” signing ” agreement by an embargoed club, Bell will be out of contract when the 1st Sept comes along, but should an embargoed club be agreeing terms before they are allowed to “sign” players or should that also include contracts? The definition of these terms should be important, and the terms of the embargo should be transparent. Was anything “signed” and is that allowed?


  5. yourhavingalaugh says:
    Sunday, April 7, 2013 at 23:40

    He can spend what he wants, any time he wants.

    If the player is not registered then they cannot play.


  6. Captain Haddock says:
    Sunday, April 7, 2013 at 23:48

    They can register players who are out of contract at any time. It does not have to be during a “window”

    Quite right to, it means that players who are out of work can get a job and make a living.


  7. Is it not a registration ban? They can sign and employ whomever they want, they can’t however register them to play football until September first.


  8. McCoist is quoted in tomorrow’s Scotsman, “Charles has gone on record as saying there is £10m to spend when it’s available – and there will be money to spend”.

    Several times within the same article McCoist repeats the Charles Green promise of £10 million to spend on players. It’s as if Ally is putting Green on notice that he will expect him to honour his pledge.

    However, if Green has told McCoist he will only get the £10 million “when it’s available” then I rather suspect Sally can kiss his war chest goodbye in the summer. There may be money to spend as the illustrious manager tells us, but it will be a pittance. Mr Green will have prior call on such funds as he prepares his exit strategy.


  9. ratethisthenyabampots says:
    Sunday, April 7, 2013 at 22:16
    ===============================

    Your poll suggests this is far from a site dominated by Celtic fans.


  10. The delusion knows no bounds – a snippet from the Darkside giving reasons why Rangers should move to England.

    ‘5) Our history in Scotland would count for something in England, changing leagues doesn’t make your successes void!’

    So the history they bought appears to be fully portable to the EPL – more moonbeams or is it stars in their eyes?


  11. With CG’s irresponsible racist comments recently and the tut, tutting at any who dare object, who knows where this behaviour may lead?

    The the rangers fans might start reading this as a ‘Green’ light to start giving RCs/Irish/celtic fans derogatory names. You never know….


  12. My above post was tongue in cheek, (humour, banter) by the way.

    Just a wee bit concerned about folk getting a bit touchy of late.

    But on a more serious note, did Mr Charles ever think to ask his ‘friends’ if they liked what they were being referred to, or would prefer not being called those names?

    Charles, the key word here is respect!


  13. I have given Keith Jackson some credit over the last weeks for finally saying what needs to be said, once again I think he has hit the nail on the head with his piece this morning.

    Looks like he has been let of the leash over recent weeks, the future could be brighter for the MSM if he and others are allowed to say what they think as long as there is genuine cause to do so, and that applies to all teams.

    Well worth a read!


  14. I don’t know if behind all the colourful bluster if the blue club directors ever talk honestly at or even hold proper board meetings.

    I do know that as a publicly listed organisation their directors (each and every one of them) have onerous duties and responsibilities. It is legal and city stuff and much less establishment-friendly than the SFA, SPL or SFL bendy rule books.

    I don’t really expect Charles to be worried about this kind of thing because it strikes me that he thinks he will get away with everything but they do have a Chairman, Mr Malcolm Murray who has a role to ensure that the company is legit.

    Being on the Rangers board is not just an honorary position with nice seats and a free silk tie.

    I’d be taking legal advice if I was Malcolm or Walter etc who are now in a very difficult position, I’d go as far as saying its untenable.

    And they all know it.


  15. i think your take on the stats is a little ‘wild’.

    of 305 overall votes, 147 are celtic fans. which is 48% – if the site was to be viewed on a per club basis, only just on the premier league, it would mean each of the other clubs sharing 52% of the votes, or just 4.8% per club.
    Since we would hope there would be votes for supporters of all clubs, across all senior divisions, (42 clubs….), it would then mean that 52% of votes is spread across 41 other clubs, each one then having (as a leveraged average), 1.27%.

    If suppporter voting power was seen as being indicative, then yes, this forum is very much dominated by Celtic fans…and I’m another one.


  16. yakutsuki says:
    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 08:32

    While your post may be tongue and cheek I think the point is well made.

    I too believe that sometimes the political correctness thing goes over the top.

    However people in a positision such as Green should really be a bit more responsible.

    Can you imagine the reaction if at the press conference for the first ever Celtic v T’Rangers game Neil Lennon said he was looking forward to welcoming his little ‘Attila’ friend McCoist back to Celtic Park.

    I have never bought into the bluff Yorkshireman nonesense. Many I have met are just arrogant rude and condescending..


  17. Morning
    The direction this is now taking looks to me that one or the other [Ally,Charles] wont be at Sevco come August


  18. upthehoops says:
    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 07:16

    ratethisthenyabampots says:
    Sunday, April 7, 2013 at 22:16
    CFC 157 Others 174
    ===============================

    Your poll suggests this is far from a site dominated by Celtic fans.

    Does it? So far, 47% of respondents are CFC fans. Surely quite dominant?


  19. neepheid says:

    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 09:02
    ———————————-

    Hey Neepheid, 2nd place on the podium mate. I just pipped you at the post (if you pardon the pun..)


  20. Have links to this website ever been published before ? The piece whilst old is by Sevco’s #1 big0t Mr McMurdo. What I find ironic is the poster referring to the TSB as heartless bankers. I’m surprised there is no shareholders support group as with RBOS questioning or looking to sue those formerly in charge of the BOS who were irresponsible in lending to the likes of MIH and RFC.

    http://oldco.coplandroad.org/511655#


  21. That’s a good shout #showusthesevcodeeds 🙂


  22. hangerhead says:
    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 08:47

    i think your take on the stats is a little ‘wild’.

    of 305 overall votes, 147 are celtic fans. which is 48% – if the site was to be viewed on a per club basis, only just on the premier league, it would mean each of the other clubs sharing 52% of the votes, or just 4.8% per club.
    Since we would hope there would be votes for supporters of all clubs, across all senior divisions, (42 clubs….), it would then mean that 52% of votes is spread across 41 other clubs, each one then having (as a leveraged average), 1.27%.

    If suppporter voting power was seen as being indicative, then yes, this forum is very much dominated by Celtic fans…and I’m another one.
    —————————————————
    It can’t be judged accurately without knowing what the relative proportion of supporters for each club is in reality, which would allow a weighting to be made. Assuming that Rangers fans are by choice less well represented here than other clubs (just a guess, may be wrong) and that Celtic do have substantially many more supporters than any of the other clubs whose supporters are represented (and that people responded honestly), then as a rough indicator, I’d suggest that the straw poll does imply very a decent proportion of non-Celtic supporters on this forum.


  23. angus1983 says:

    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 09:05

    Does it? So far, 47% of respondents are CFC fans. Surely quite dominant?

    ———————————————

    I don’t think there is any doubt this is a forum where the larger percentage of readers are Celtic fans, this may also apply to individuals that post but I believe that percentage is much smaller.

    Is that not to be expected when Celtic is arguably the team with the largest global fan base?

    For me, this is not the issue, the issue is finding balance and ensuring all voices are heard and respected equally, when I think of the posters I like to read then I actually think of just as many individuals who support teams other than my own.

    It has been said many times before; we need popular opinion to be challenged, including and especially our own. That means as long as Rangers are the main focus of attention, we need more posters like our old friend Adam to constantly challenge and sometimes correct us (not always before some of you jump down my throat).

    We need more Rangers supporting posters, we need more Morton, Dundee, Ayr United and Dumbarton supporters, we do not need less Celtic supporters.


  24. madbhoy24941 says:
    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 08:47

    I have given Keith Jackson some credit over the last weeks for finally saying what needs to be said, once again I think he has hit the nail on the head with his piece this morning.

    Well worth a read!
    ———————————————–
    Yes, indignant rather than ranting, asking serous questions, drawing together some threads that need to be drawn together to form the wider view. Excellent stuff.


  25. From the DR piece:

    WHAT exactly is Ibrox chairman Neil Murray doing as the club’s most high profile characters fight it out in public?

    NEIL MURRAY,
    No wonder Charles pumped him.From chief scout to chairman and all in the space of a week!.


  26. madbhoy24941 says:
    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 09:07
    2 1 Rate This
    neepheid says:

    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 09:02
    ———————————-

    Hey Neepheid, 2nd place on the podium mate. I just pipped you at the post (if you pardon the pun..)
    ++++++++++++++++

    Always the bridesmaid, never the bride, that’s my life story! In fact I had seen your post, but had to search for the article, so I just wanted to post a link. Was it Stunney? who used to “do the papers” every morning (or middle of the night, more like!)- that’s something I miss, especially now that it’s all kicking off again in a very interesting way!


  27. Having read the Jangles piece this morning…there are a couple of things that struck me…

    He genuinly believes it was the Record that hunted down Whyte? nope the Record were a year late…and only after Whyte had pulled the trigger on the club…and has he forgotten it was him who trumpeted the ‘off the radar wealth’…

    Secondly…it is surprising to see Jangles in a full no holds barred…I’m calling you out style approach to Green whilst having a dig at another paper…

    I think the protective media now realise they have been well and truly used by shysters…and this is just an attempt at saving face…because make no mistake…Jangles hasn’t had a Damascus moment…his piece has the feel of a third parties hand..

    Then again this could all be part of an elaborate plan designed to remove Green and have a trusted friendly face step in and everyone lives happily ever after…

    Ps, Anyone else notice the lack of papers reference to SDM…yet he still pops in now and again with opinions and comment..would not surprise me if he still has influnce/decision making within the Ibrox triangle!


  28. paulmac2 says:
    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 09:50

    Then again this could all be part of an elaborate plan designed to remove Green and have a trusted friendly face step in and everyone lives happily ever after…

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

    I wonder what odds you’d get on Longmuir replacing Green.


  29. The KJ article reads to me as a ” toy’s oot the pram cos they told the Sun and no me”

    It’s like there has been a total eclipse on what the paper’s actually said at the time.
    I agree that a lot of what he say’s is correct and accurate but for me it’s too little too late, and it read’s like sour grapes.
    It’s like trying to score points off of another’s mistakes. Maybe if this was the type of reporting they had printed all along then the paper (and many other’s) would not be in the position they find themselves in now.

    Seems to be a lot of it going around……


  30. http://alzipratu.wordpress.com/2013/04/07/73/

    The RFFF and the buried heads syndrome
    Forgive me for my obsession but you see, as someone who makes his living in the charity world, this is incredibly important to me. Study after study has shown that the public perception of charity is absolutely fundamental to how charities raise funds and if a fraud is committed by or within a charity, then all charities are viewed with suspicion by the public and suffer a dip in donations.

    The basis of this article is a piece put together by my late, dear friend Corsica and myself and which was posted on http://www.rangerstaxcase.com back in April 2012. I have updated it to take account of information which has been passed to me knowingly and unknowingly from within the Office for the Scottish Charity Regulator (OSCR) and Glasgow City Council. I have also taken some information direct from the Rangers Fans Fighting Fund itself.

    The RFFF was launched on 13 March 2012, almost exactly one month after Rangers FC went into administration from which it would never recover. It was openly stated that donations were to be deposited in a Royal Bank of Scotland account (00741694) in the name of the Rangers Supporters Assembly.

    Problem #1: the Rangers Supporters Assembly is not registered as a corporate body. In other words, it is neither a company nor a charity and could never realistically expect to attain charitable status given its stated aims:

    • Improve Communication/Consultation between Rangers Fans and Rangers Football Club.
    • Represent the views of Rangers Fans to Rangers Football Club in matters of policy, services and any other pertinent matter
    • Create a stronger association between Rangers Fans and Rangers Football Club
    • Reduce fragmented discussions.
    • Help to grow the Rangers fanbase worldwide.
    • Help to ensure the long term growth of Rangers Football Club

    It does claim, however, to have a constitution, a management committee and a membership consisting of a range of Rangers fans groups, none of whom are registered as companies or charities. It must therefore be an unincorporated association.

    Problem #2: unincorporated associations can’t carry out any commercial trade. It is illegal. Nor can they ask for donations as this is a charitable term (they can ask for contributions) although I doubt that OSCR would hang them for that.

    Since it was launched in March 2012, the fund has gathered in approximately £650,000. An accurate figure is not available as all financial records have been removed from the website since they were publicised by Corsica back in summer 2012. However, we know from the RFFF itself that its balance stood at £530,663 in November 2012 and this is consistent with the earlier financial information which is now no longer available (I will let it pass without comment that it seems bizarre that there is no transparency over money yet again down Ibrox way).

    That income – according to the RFFF in June 2012 – came from two sources: contributions and sales (principally flags and pin badges). Again, because the information is no longer published, I cannot be 100% accurate but in June 2012, the RFFF showed income of c£175,000 from sales.

    Problem #3: anyone or any business which generates income of more than £75,000 must register for VAT. Let me spell it out – the RFFF cannot register for VAT because it is not a legitimate business. To date, not a penny has been paid to HMRC by the RFFF. So the RFFF and implicitly Rangers FC (given that the RFFF were operating with the full knowledge and support of Duff & Phelps) have yet again wilfully and negligently defrauded HMRC out of taxation.

    Problem #4: I assume that, given the wilful disregard for law to date, the RFFF has never sought to protect and indemnify anyone involved by taking out appropriate insurances such as public liability, employers liability, trustee liability, etc. As an unincorporated body, it is very difficult to see how they could possibly have obtained insurance cover. They have therefore broken the law here in carrying out trading and public activities without adequately protecting ordinary members of the public or indeed anyone working on their behalf whether paid or voluntary.

    Problem #5: Under the 1982 Civic Government (Scotland) Act and the 1990 Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Act, street collections must be charitable and they must have written permission in advance (no later than 8 weeks in Glasgow) from the local authority. Again, let me spell that out: you have to apply for permission before the collection takes place and the collection must be for either a charity or a charitable cause.

    If the collection is to benefit a charitable cause but not a charitable organisation (eg, to buy a specific piece of medical equipment for a specific hospital), written confirmation must be produced from the beneficiary authorising the applicant to organise a public charitable collection on their behalf. If the collection is to benefit a charitable organisation then the applicant charity must submit proof that it is a bona fide charity.

    As I think I have established quite clearly, the RFFF is neither a charity nor a charitable body. Neither are the Rangers Supporters Assembly or the Rangers Supporters Trust. And neither was the Rangers Football Club in whose name ultimately the funds were collected. Ergo they could not possibly be granted permission by Glasgow City Council to hold a public street collection.

    It took me some time and two requests under Freedom of Information to get any information out of Glasgow City Council (as the licensing body) but this finally came at the end of March 2013. In their response to my questions, Glasgow City Council clearly and unambiguously state:

    “…can confirm that this authority has never received an application from this organisation, therefore no licence has been granted which permits these collections.”

    Problem #6?: As I understand the anti-money laundering regulations, a professional such as a solicitor or accountant or bank manager must verify and assure the identity of any new client and the provenance or source of the funds used to pay said professional. Now, we know that the RFFF instructed Michael McLaughlin of DWF Biggart Baillie and James Mure QC to defend Rangers and Sevco in the SPL hearing but, given the provenance of the RFFF funds and the illegal way in which they were collected and given that that RFFF and RSA are not legal entities, how on earth did Messrs McLaughlin and Mure manage to satisfy the money laundering regulations?

    I’m sure there is a very plausible explanation somewhere for all of this but it does raise – yet again – questions over governance down Govan way and to paraphrase Mr McCoist, I think the Scottish public deserve to know, don’t you?

    Perhaps the Law Society of Scotland, the Police, the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator, Glasgow City Council and HMRC (who will all receive a copy of this article) would like to comment?

    PS: I hope to soon complete a piece on the Rangers Charity Foundation but I leave you, in the meantime, with the rather tantalising information that it is now OSCR’s longest-running investigation (outstripping even Glasgow East Regeneration Agency which involved malpractice and maladministration!). Now why is that?


  31. saskya1888 says:
    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 10:11

    The KJ article reads to me as a ” toy’s oot the pram cos they told the Sun and no me”
    It’s like trying to score points off of another’s mistakes. Maybe if this was the type of reporting they had printed all along then the paper (and many other’s) would not be in the position they find themselves in now.
    ———————————–
    Agreed to all of that, but in the world of tabloid journalism, that kind of dog-eat-dog rivalry is always going to be important (to them at least, even if the readers couldn’t care less who got what story). And yes, years behind the curve. But even so, KJ’s piece asks a very pertinent question, and does it in a very public forum – where are the board? Where is Malcolm Murray?


  32. With reference partly to Jackson but really more to the Scotsman history rewrite on Friday /Saturday. One of the main things that drew me first to RTC and has held my attention ever since is in its ability to predict what the MSM will, or more likely will not say. That they don’t report information as is is poor, that what they do say being spoon fed is worse but at the end of the day the charge against them mostly is not what you did, its what you didn’t do (or say).

    Contract this to the SFA in particular.


  33. tomtomaswell says:
    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 10:04

    Then again this could all be part of an elaborate plan designed to remove Green and have a trusted friendly face step in and everyone lives happily ever after…

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

    I wonder what odds you’d get on Longmuir replacing Green.

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

    I wasn’t aware Longmuir even owned a cardigan?


  34. NTHM
    Brilliant post.Looking forward to the next one. Incidentally,what was the story with GEAR?


  35. Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 10:15

    Squeeky bum time, brilliant !


  36. smugas says:
    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 10:23
    1 0 Rate This
    tomtomaswell says:
    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 10:04

    Then again this could all be part of an elaborate plan designed to remove Green and have a trusted friendly face step in and everyone lives happily ever after…

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

    I wonder what odds you’d get on Longmuir replacing Green.

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

    I wasn’t aware Longmuir even owned a cardigan?

    ———————————————-

    Of course he does. He just hasn’t worn it in public – yet 😀


  37. Longmuir will be in a taxi over to Paisley at this very moment as St Mirren have announced they will vote against change at next mondays meeting,via sky sports news,here we go here we go here we go,Charlie will be along shortly with his views on this piece of treachery after his meeting at Paisley last week


  38. Jackson’s article, much like the Richard Bath piece on Sunday is an exercise in rewriting recent history, an attempt to matter-of-factly register the false notion that the MSM “always knew” that things were dodgy. Spiers was also at it last week with the Jimmy Calderwood story: all very Alex-Cameron-envelope-in-desk-drawer stuff.

    This may be an indication that the dodgy-dealings and even possible criminality surrounding the Rangers saga is approaching a conclusion, and as the MSM run out of rope fast, the Record for sure appears to be jumping ship.

    For clarity, up until the club went into administration, NO Scottish journalist expressed any concern or fears about David Murray’s spending at Rangers, and neither Keith Jackson nor anyone else at the Record has ever expressed a view that the assets of the club in liquidation were sold cheaply, far less suggest that there was something dodgy about it.

    Both Bath and Jackson have written pieces (or in Jackson’s case possibly had it written for him) which are ostensibly about the scandals at Rangers – but which are in reality just a defence of their own profession in general and their newspapers in particular.

    Jackson spent more time in that article having a go at the Sun than at anyone else. After reading KJ’s piece, one could be forgiven for thinking that Ian King or Bill Leckie were responsible for the demise of Rangers. An attempt to portray the Sun as the betrayers of the Rangers tradition whist politely ignoring the fact that the former sports editor of the record appears to have been using that paper as a PR medium for both Craig Whyte AND Charles Green.

    Green now looks to have outlived his usefulness, and may well be hunted down by the press pack, but the veil of secrecy, obfuscation and untruth will be cast over proceedings once again as we move into phase three. Watch out for the new messiah who will emerge presently.

    And it will all begin again..


  39. When Mr Charles visited New St Mirren Park recently I wonder if “4 Russian Women” was mentioned to Gilmour. Just askin like. 🙂


  40. Did I hear A. McCoist correctly on Sky testerday? I thought he said that the newclub were far from being the worst ever to play out of Ibrox. He went on that anybody thinking such a thing had no idea how tough it is to play in that division of the SFL.

    Only the day before, C. Green had repeated his charge that the team was indeed the worst ever. When thereby accusing his boss of being ignorant of football affairs, A. McCoist spoke with passion and certainty, like somebody who had received official backing.

    I’m trying to imagine the media storm if any other manager in Scottish football told the people of several nations on TV that the owner (??) of the club was ignorant. Looks like C. Green is on his way. If I had shares I’d trade them for cash toute d’suite. If C. Green cashes in his, any market value will go with him.


  41. chipm0nk says:
    Sunday, April 7, 2013 at 19:58

    Watched the Ramsden’s Cup final today.

    Excellent drama and some attractive football.

    Well done to both teams, congratulations to Queen of the South.
    =================================================

    Can’t disagree that on the day the better team overall won. (But waited a day before posting so I could say that without grudging). Not completely gutted as we have an even bigger game on Wednesday against Morton. Winner of that will have a decided psychological advantage (in our case also points) going into the final run-in. It could even go to the last game of the season.


  42. From the Express. You could not make it up. Referee are crap because there’s no Rangers in the top league 🙂

    FORMER top referee David Syme has backed Neil Lennon over the Celtic manager’s criticism of Scottish officials.
    By: Michael Baillie

    Bobby Madden had a bad day at the office when Celtic took on St Mirren

    Lennon branded the performance of referee Bobby Madden “appalling” after a string of debatable decisions in Celtic’s 1-1 draw at St Mirren.

    Lennon claimed there has been a worrying decline in the standard of SPL officials and ex-FIFA whistler Syme agrees and believes many of the current refs lack experience and the courage of their own convictions over big decisions.

    Syme said: “I would agree entirely with Neil Lennon about the fall in standards of refereeing.

    I fear the refs are being influenced too much by the other guys on the sidelines.

    “There are many reasons, but one I think is pertinent is the wiring-up of officials.

    “I think it has made referees too reliable (sic) on other opinions, because they are getting fed information from the other officials in the game and it might not be what the referee sees himself.

    “I know the assistants are there to assist, but in the old school of refereeing you had one man in charge and you called it as you saw it.

    “I fear the refs are being influenced too much by the other guys on the sidelines.

    “I think they are lacking the courage of their convictions.

    “In my opinion, Bobby Madden got four calls wrong – a bad day at the office.

    “The current crop of refs, apart from Craig Thomson, are far too inexperienced.

    “They need more experience but we’ve been saying that for years. FIFA have been trying to bring some through very early.

    “It’s one thing knowing the laws of the game. Willie Collum is to me a prime example of a stickler for the laws of the game and he knows each one very well, but he seems to lack a feeling for football.”

    Syme believes the officials have been hindered by the lack of Old Firm clashes this season as that white-hot encounter was the making of many refs.

    He said: “Referees coming through now don’t have the Rangers-Celtic games to handle.

    “They are not getting a hard game or being tested.

    “I don’t know what I’d have been like as a referee if I didn’t have to handle 19 Rangers-Celtic games.

    “You’d either rise or fall as a referee because of how you handled that game.”


  43. myohmy1 says:
    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 10:30
    0 0 Rate This
    NTHM
    Brilliant post.Looking forward to the next one. Incidentally,what was the story with GEAR?

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

    this is not my work, sorry to have misled anyone. It is the work of corsicacharity – regular poster up here and colleague of the late Corsica.

    After reading it i was wondering, and maybe corsicacharity could help here.

    1. would ANY charity be able to raise funds and to donate it to either a private individual or PLC business that was on hard times?

    2. Could the RFFF be a sole trader/partnership (i.e. not a limited company) and if so, are they allowed to raise “contributions” which they can dispose of any way they want?

    I guess this doesn’t get around the VAT and/or money laundering issues – but just a start

    I also assume that if this went through the Rangers own charity foundation, that charity would soon be struck off?

    thanks


  44. DR definitely “after” CG

    FED-UP Rangers fans yesterday called on owner Charles Green to explain the role of a Craig Whyte associate at Ibrox.

    The saga took a twist last week when Whyte, 41, claimed he used Green as a frontman to buy the club after he caused them to go bust.

    And the Ibrox hate figure has threatened to sue the Yorkshire businessman for allegedly reneging on the secret deal.

    Green, 59, denied the claim, although has admitted he told Whyte what he wanted to hear in order to seize control.

    But the scandal has led fans to query the involvement of twice-bankrupt businessman Jim Park, a lifelong pal of Whyte’s dad Tom.

    The Sunday Mail revealed in August how Whyte’s associate joined Green in the directors’ box for a match against Brechin City.

    Park has held 74 directorships with firms in Scotland, including debt recovery and call centres – nearly all of which have been wound up.

    At the time, the club admitted that the 58-year-old was a “consultant” helping to introduce financial backers to Green.

    Club sources also said that they had no knowledge of his connection to Whyte.

    Fans are now questioning that and Rangers Supporters’ Association secretary John Macmillan said yesterday of the link: “It’s rather mystifying.

    “It’s one hell of a job trying to work out what is going in the background – and it would be helpful if Charles Green could come out and explain what the position is here.”

    Green painted himself as the saviour of Rangers after Whyte’s disastrous tenure saw the club plunged into administration.

    But the chief executive now faces a battle to regain the trust of fans after it was revealed he was working with Whyte at the start of his bid to buy Rangers.

    Park, of Dumbarton, often travels on business to Monaco, where Whyte has a luxury home.

    At the time, a source told us: “Park has been working as a consultant in the few months since the new regime took over.

    “He’s been talking to the top people and introducing potential investors. The Whyte connection was not known to us until today. It is now.”

    Park told us: “I haven’t got a role yet with Rangers but I have met with the team who own the club.”

    Macmillan added: “No one wants to see Craig anywhere near Ibrox or getting any shares back – but what is happening does raise questions.

    “The one thing absolutely clear is that someone is lying.

    “If Green has to go to court to prove it, so be it – but that has to be the last resort.”

    Another fans’ chief insisted the timing of new claims by Whyte were motivated by “vengeance”.

    Mark Dingwall, of the Rangers’ Supporters Trust, said: “I would love to see Whyte in a court – preferably in the dock for what he has done to Rangers.

    “I think his timing is motivated by the looming date for season ticket renewals and that he is looking to inflict even more damage on the club, purely for vengeance.”


  45. Big Pink says:
    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 10:46

    Say what you like about SDM and what he ended up doing to Rangers but at least he maintained a sense of dignity and kept the press at bay.

    As a caller to Sportsound Extra intimated Whyte and now Green are opening up ‘the great Scottish institution’ to ridicule.

    It seems the MSM are getting a bit more gallus in relation to having a poke at T’Rangers and Green in particular.

    Once they taste a little blood could they go all the way?

    Afterall from Keith Jackson’s column it looks like the red tops are beginning to concentrate on who will win the battle to get to the truth about Green et al first

    The status of the ‘Establishment’ club and the damage that could be done looks like it is possibly slipping down the priority list.


  46. In connection with the David Syme article…

    Bobby Madden got 4, yes that’s FOUR, big decisions wrong at Paisley and that’s because he doesn’t have more difficult games to handle?

    WTF!!!

    and by the way, i remember David Syme as a referee he would have been as well wearing brown brogues and a cardigan while he reffed


  47. Big Pink says:
    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 11:

    I am in no way advocating the return of Rangers and I don’t think Syme is either to the top flight but I can empathise with his comment that refereeing in what was referred to formerly as an Old Firm match would have been good training. In the atmosphere of those games you had to be a brave man and therefore for any novice referee it would have been good experience as crowd reaction can influence decisions.


  48. briggsbhoy…

    Got to disagree here…

    You do your training at the “diddy” games and progress through the ranks, supposedly based on your performances in these games…

    Throwing a Bobby Madden into one of those gone (forever) but not forgotten “old firm” games would have been ridiculous…

    4, yes that’s FOUR glaring errors in a run of the mill fixture…

    How many in an “old firm” (sic) game?

    And that’s without factoring in the “honest mistakes”


  49. It would be a pity if we were to jump to conclusions regarding St. Mirren and Stewart Gilmour’s decision to vote against the 12-12-18 proposal.

    Just because it (on the face it anyway) suits Rangers, I think it would be a mistake to infer collusion. It would also make the emergence of an SPL2 by invitation less likely if the proposals are defeated at SPL level.

    Personally, I do not think that the new setup makes any sense. I agree with Gilmour that the middle-eight proposition is ridiculous and comedic.

    We are being fed the line that bigger divisions are uneconomic by the every same person who told us that the SPL wasn’t a viable proposition without Rangers. The same person who denies using the word Armageddon, but who used the fear of the concept to talk down the sport in this country throughout the entire summer of 2012.

    I don’t buy the bigger leagues theory any more than I did Armageddon. Peter Lawwell at one point spoke of Celtic’s willingness to go with 14 teams in the top division. Where did that idea go? Perhaps it was shelved because it would look as if it was giving Rangers a fast-track to the top and thus became yet another political casualty of the Cluster*uc* at Ibrox?

    On St. Mirren and Gilmour collusion charges – I doubt it – and in any event we should give them the benefit of the doubt.


  50. Surely OF matches were never used as ‘training’, it was pretty well always the most experienced refs that got the gig. And if it was also a cup semi-final or final or likely league decider getting the game was seen as a kind of ‘prize’ to refs, a kind of ‘anointing with oil’.


  51. I too remember Syme as a ref, big on gesticulation! I also remember his as an ‘expert’ on Sportsound, a feature that was short lived. As an expert on a Celtic Rangers game Syme opined, after a naughty challenge, ‘that is not a booking, not in an Old Firm game!’ So its true, Celtic and Rangers are viewed differently by the refs, and factors other than merely the rules must be adhered to for the good of…….. er, the game?………the rest of us were of course shocked and stunned to hear this. 😉


  52. Hi 🙂

    can someone confirm once and for all…..

    did ANY staff and players “TUPE” over from RFC to Sevco (or to be accurate RFC to Sevco5088 to Sevco Scotland)

    I didn’t think TUPE legislation applied in a situation that was just an asset sale – i thought it was only if you were buying the business

    So……could CG simply have told all the staff they are out of a job unless they want to come and work for his shiney new club doing the same thing – but on much harsher T&C’s

    Would this also allow him to simply sack folk/make them redundant without having to pay up what is owed under their length of service?


  53. Big Pink says:
    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 11:35

    On St. Mirren and Gilmour collusion charges – I doubt it – and in any event we should give them the benefit of the doubt.
    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
    Agreed
    Up to the point where the good of Scottish Football prompts Donkey into a statement welcoming an SPL2 made up by breakaway SFL clubs plus TRFC and recognising them as the legitimate second league in Scotland
    Or
    Up to the point whre Gilmour sells his SPL club and licence to Green and St Mirren go to the 3rd Div


  54. I imagine St Mirren did not want to spend their football lives in a middle 8 league fighting a 4 way relegation but change must be made to benefit all of Scottish football. Time and time again we hear that Celtic and Rangers have ruled Scottish football but the truth is it is the small clubs that stop progression and change for their own self interests. Because they cannot sustain a successful business model, they expect to be subsidised by Celtic and in the past, Rangers.

    All clubs should be able to sell their televised rights to their fan base and beyond in the same way they can keep their gate money. Why should a game that could attract 100,000 ppv customers be replaced by a game with less fans attending than people attending an asda store on any given day.

    we need 1 league body and we need people with vbision to take out game forward, not failed english football and cricket bosses with clubs run by chairmen who you would not trust to run a corner shop.


  55. I don’t see St Mirren voting no as signs of collusion with green – or working to a sevco agenda

    lets face it, the redistribution of the current tv deal will hurt smaller clubs most – they are losing a % of their income, and it’s been given directly to the people who want their place at the top table

    and the middle 8 split also increases the chances that those smaller/struggling teams will be relegated.

    Now, the middle 8 might see a boost to 7 home gates as they are all flung into a relegation/survival battle – but will that income and the promised increased tv money for the 1st division be enough to make up for the guaranteed income they’d get for being 11th and in the SPL for another season?

    I actually like the idea of the middle 8 – in fact, i’d extend the idea and reset the points in all 3 of the mini leagues of 8 – why not? 1st half the season you are playing to find your level, 2nd half of the season you are playing for titles, europe, relegation – all on an even foot.

    But the league set up is just tinkering – the real issue is that we HAD 2 giant clubs with huge infrastructure who NEED CL money to keep them going. This denies any of the rest a real chance to compete.

    Celtic (and Sevco) have an advantage of a huge support, but that advantage is compounded by the rewards of teh CL and to a lesser extent EL income.

    The real issue is not how many leagues we have, but how finance is distributed.

    I honestly think we need to look at changing the financial model to be more equitable

    Radical thinking – and i’m not afraid to say it

    UEFA money to be split throughout top leauges
    TV money distributed more equitably – winner should get no more than 5% more than bottom team
    same with sponsorship money
    Squad salary caps – based on turnover
    Squad size caps (excluding youth or academy reared players)
    a percentage of gate sharing for all games
    a transfer tax – where all players bought and sold have a tax put into a cenrtal prize money pot to be shared
    restrictions of gate prices to boost attendance
    a better tv deal – allowing more games at 3pm on a sat or live on PPV
    changes to the loan system to allow short term loans outwith transfer window or adoption of feeder clubs


  56. Very much agree with Big Pink at 11:35, and arabest1 at 11:42 re Gilmour and Syme.

    Syme first: now, happily, he’s an irrelevance, but Syme’s position as a top referee was as much influenced by his father as his ability, probably much more so, in my view.

    It appears to me that Gilmour is being slated because he is being seen to vote against Green’s team being in the lowest division, whereas that is probably not even in his thoughts. Big Pink points out the possible failings of the middle eight: good in a song, shit in a league system. Adopting the proposed split will hit season ticket sales, and this is possibly where Stuart Gilmour has concerns.


  57. Big Pink , moderators , I have a post in moderation it was of the moment in relation to Whyte vs CG and how conspiracy to fraud seemed to fit the bill, I appear to have mentioned a proscribed word . Please delete the post the story has moved on somewhat since then. Apologies for giving you any hassles.
    jean7brodie haven’t forgotten trying to find their criteria for crime reporting. (Proving quite difficult)


  58. “All clubs should be able to sell their televised rights to their fan base and beyond in the same way they can keep their gate money. Why should a game that could attract 100,000 ppv customers be replaced by a game with less fans attending than people attending an asda store on any given day.”

    That’s a one way ticket to killing whats left of Scottish football off and its why we are in the mess we are in.

    It takes all the teams to make a league – without all the other clubs no club has a game to play. Why bother even having a league – just award Celtic all the cash and the money and lets watch the EPL on Sky.

    Personally I think a more even financial distribution is required – not ring fencing more for your own club at the expense of the rest – your name is’nt Peter Lawell is it?


  59. Big Pink says:
    Watch out for the new messiah who will emerge presently.

    And it will all begin again………………………………………………………..
    …………………………………………………………………………………………………………

    None of what we are seeing is what it appears to be and I think Craid and Charlie are on the same side.
    I’ve said many times that I thought we are all being played in a manner that would impress even Max Clifford.

    To find out what is really happening we have to go back.
    Back maybe to when someone needed to save his club.

    He had as Baldrick would say a cunning plan and the son of an old business associate pal was just the very chap to perform a specific (and fast) wee job.

    Some stuff happened and the job got a wee bit more complicated and took a lot longer.

    This meant the original patsy needed to get help from new patsies and the pesky bampots further complicated things a bit, affected the timings and reduced the revenue streams from season books.
    But the fans were milked magnificently and lots of other hurdles that were insurmountable to most businesses were cleared effortlessly along the way with help from powerful pals.

    The end game was and is always the same.
    A debt free blue club at the top of wherever it plays run by Rangers minded folk. (And yes some collateral damage for a few people – but mostly HMRC.)

    And maybe even an eventual return for the original owner in a honorary position.

    So we’re now seeing the transition to the final phase.
    Its a bit messy because the patsies and spivs and ticketus (all Corsica’s Swiss collaborators) have to get paid.
    And that might get messy and mean we need a new new team who still get promoted even after a ten point deduction. And then the tax man won’t know if they are chasing the old old club or the sevco version.
    But debt free it will be and on the way back.

    Looking ahead – JT’s appointment was a wee clue.
    He was always part of the next blue team and a link to the past as a friend of an “ex” owner.

    Now where will the establishment club find their next funding and their next chief exec?


  60. abigboydiditandranaway says:

    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 11:32

    briggsbhoy…

    Got to disagree here…

    You do your training at the “diddy” games and progress through the ranks, supposedly based on your performances in these games…

    Throwing a Bobby Madden into one of those gone (forever) but not forgotten “old firm” games would have been ridiculous…

    4, yes that’s FOUR glaring errors in a run of the mill fixture…

    How many in an “old firm” (sic) game?

    And that’s without factoring in the “honest mistakes”
    …………………………….

    The St. Mirren v Celtic game would have been a catagory 3 game for a ref.

    A Celtic v Rangers (now SEVCO) would have been a catagory 1 game.

    I remember Callum Murray’s first Celtic v Rangers (now SEVCO) game…you could tell this was a big step up for him in concentration…focus and control..so much much so…at the end it finished 0-0…Scott Brown was carried off on a stretcher after being treated for 5 minutes…6 subs and 2 other stoppages later…and Callum added 2 minutes of stoppage time..

    When asked why he had only added 2 minutes…he replied I forgot?…The same ref who should have issued a second yellow and a red to Daniel Couzan at Ibrox for taking his top off and running into the crowd after scoring against Falkirk….when asked why he didn’t,,,he replied I forgot the rules about taking your top off?…the week before JVOH had been sent off for the same thing….forgetting seemed to be Callum’s achilles heal? Yet he never forgot to turn up the following week at the game he was appointed to?


  61. PS re the MSM possibly going for Charlie’s jugular.

    It looks more and more like the status quo will exist for next season.
    So that issue could be wrapped up in a week or so’s time.
    Celtic will win the SPL shortly
    Div 2, 3 League and Ramsden’s cups all sorted.
    World Cup qualification doon the pan.

    So what have the footy journos got left to comment on for the summer ahead.
    Scottish Cup ? (over by end May)
    Div 1 battle? (but that could be over come Wednesday night if Thistle win)
    Hearts and Dunfermline? (However all has gone quiet on those fronts as people have got their heads down and are battling on).

    and ehhhh T’Rangers – still big news but for all the wrong reasons

    Will Whyte issue more tapes and possibly documents?
    Will Ally get his £10m to ensure next seasons team isn’t the ‘worst ever’?
    What porkies will Charles be telling to get the season tickets sold?
    What will the end of year accounts say?
    Will the stadium ever be renamed?
    Will there be an Orange strip?
    Will Charlie insist the shirt sponsor change their name to suit his 1970’s mindset?
    When will the stadium refurbishment begin (and cash be spent) being they are hosting the Rugby 7s at Commonwealth Games?
    Will we see any worldwide academies?
    If there is a six month lock-in for insitutional invesotrs how many will bale out end of June?
    Will Malcolm Murray ever come out of his cave?
    etc etc etc.

    What will the end


  62. St Mirren have in the past at least, listened to their fans. I see little gain for St Mirren in what is on the table, as the proposals are aimed at assisting Div1 in the immediate future. But let them vote, which is a little harder than talking to Chic.

    I have been suprised from day one that the indication on the SPL vote would be 12-0 for.

    It’s really hard to imagine, but if the TRFC were in the SPL and god help us CFC were in the 4th, “why are you giving away our money” would have changed the split of cash to make up the loss of four big games. I credit CFC for the goodwill shown to all (12-0), especially since TRFC will at some point collect the bonus, and thank us no end, in public, no doubt.

    Can I ask, is the rule on accounts for SPL entry still alive and at present non-negotiable. And if so, does this mean TRFC might collect the bonus more than once.


  63. “All clubs should be able to sell their televised rights to their fan base and beyond in the same way they can keep their gate money.”

    ———————————————————————————————
    Yes, because that system has done such a excellent job of fostering a competitive league in Spain. 🙄

    Well done to NTHM for attempting to discern the logical reasons behind Stuart Gimlour’s decision, rather than resorting to the mindless smears that have disappointingly been prevalent on this site.

    Ironically the retention of 11-1 is also a major sticking point for SMFC as they fear a reaction from fans if they move to have this enshrined for the next three years.


  64. Galling fiver says:

    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 12:18

    Assuming Ross County stick to their guns, then this particular League Reconstruction proposal is DOA. I hope Big Pink and others are correct and this isn’t the prelude to the introduction of an invitational SPL2, Another breakaway invitational league would be disastrous, whether T’Rangers were one of the invitees or not.


  65. finloch says:
    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 12:09

    (And yes some collateral damage for a few people – but mostly HMRC)
    ======================================================

    finloch – I cannot see HMRC being a victim when all of this plays out.

    While they have said that they wanted to see a team continue to play football out of Ibrox, given the events over the weekend re the alledged partnership involving TGEF and CG, if they feel that they are being shafted, I strongly suspect that they through BDO would move to secure the assets that were disposed off by Duff and Duffer (copyright acknowledged), from SEVCO.

    What happend next – a fire sale?

    Mind you could (S)DM purchase the assets with the c£6M he obtained via his EBT?

    I do not think for one second that HMRC will let any spives walk away from this.


  66. smugas says:
    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 10:23

    4

    0

    Rate This

    tomtomaswell says:
    Monday, April 8, 2013 at 10:04

    Then again this could all be part of an elaborate plan designed to remove Green and have a trusted friendly face step in and everyone lives happily ever after…

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

    I wonder what odds you’d get on Longmuir replacing Green.

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

    I wasn’t aware Longmuir even owned a cardigan?
    myohmy1 says:
    ——————————————————————————————————————-

    Ahhh, but he had the dignified brown brogues on yesterday though…….


  67. Long Time Lurker says:

    I do not think for one second that HMRC will let any spives walk away from this.
    ……………………………………………………………………………….

    LTL, – nothing would make me happier especially if the trail starts at Charlie, and includes Duff and Phelps, Craig, the Knighted one and their pals.

    Sadly nothing we have seen from HMRC and BDO, the Police, our Politicians, the Administrators, or the Judiciary so far would suggest that there is a will to do the right thing.

    The only guys shouting foul and seeking honesty seem to be fans like us.

Comments are closed.