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. HirsutePursuit says:
    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 12:51

    “As long as he can show that he had intended to fully adhere to the Ticketus contract – by actually supplying those season tickets, Craig Whyte is in the clear.”

    Exactly how I read it, at least that would the case when I studied contract law in the late sixties.
    Contract law is based on the principle expressed in the phrase pacta sunt servanda “agreements must be kept” and there must be consensus ad idem “a meeting of minds”, amongst other things.
    The elements of a contract are offer, acceptance and consideration.

    SDM offers RFC for sale.
    CW accepts that offer.
    Consideration £1.00 (This is the important bit, he does not use ticketus money to buy the club) Also there is a reason why the consideration so low*

    Valid legal contract, CW now owns club.

    *CW knows that RFC use Ticketus to “borrow” money based on future ticket sales. CW borrows from Ticketus and uses part of the proceeds to pass to Lloyds Bank. As owner of the club he can spend the money on whatever he likes ?
    CW referred to this on his television interview.
    The rest is as HP says above.


  2. scapaflow14 says:
    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 13:26

    Oh dear, things just keep getting worse, now the sponsor is upset
    —————————————————————————————————
    Yea but what about the new shirt sponsor – they are in a commercial head to head with Tennents vis a vis the cider market. Now that Tennents has clearly attacked racism can Blackthorn ignore that – I don’t think so.

    And what about Ashley – is he prepared to risk the Sports Direct brand – He must be wondering how he ended up in this mess. And what about the Adidas and Dallas Cowboy deals they could be in danger 🙂

    Ratner Green is finished all that remains to be seen is what size of warchest he leaves with.


  3. Danish Pastry says:

    Thursday, April 11, 2013 at 15:27

    ————

    Cheers McCaig,
    If the ex-directors wrote off their loans things would look better. Has there been talk of that? Was also wondering if the ruling regarding Fratton Park might have any bearing on EEP in any eventual fan buy out.
    ————

    Thanks for your interest.

    There has been talk of debt write-off. Gavin Masterton said somewhere that he didn’t expect all his money back but he’d like some of it. From memory, the figure quoted a couple of months ago was £3m. I took that to be a opening position for negotiaton, but that has been superseded by events.

    Some former directors were rumoured to be behind “The Pars Community” who were proposing a different fan ownership model. I think there would be some reluctance for some directors to write off debts unilaterally, and given Mr Masterton seemed barely on speaking terms with TPC, negotations foundered.

    One question I would ask from the experts on here is the extent to which such interested parties have a say in any proposed CVA.

    If they are owed money, do they have a say?
    If as part of a CVA proposal they agree to write down their debt, is their vote also written down?
    Is Mr Masterton allowed a vote since he was “at the wheel” and he called in the administrators?

    You’ll need to clarify the Fratton Park ruling for me. At the moment East End Park is owned by one of Mr Masterton’s other companies (although it is security for a massive mortgage). I attempted to blog on the facts as I knew them a few weeks ago, if that would be of any interest?.


  4. Charles’s defence on the charge of colluding with Craig Whyte (to be read in a broad Yorkshire accent)

    “Tha knows what t’problem is eer, dontcha. Its me Yorkshire accent. Did I tell thee I was frompt Yorkshire, salt of thee earth lads frompt Yorkshire, ah tell thee. Well, t’anyway, I was talking to this chappie when the conversation turned to running. Did ah tell thee that I was t’champion runner int youth. Anyhows, I was t’telling chap that he looked like a young lad frompt Sheffield that I used to thrash regularly in t’olden days. Did you know Sheffield was in t’Yorkshire. So I said to this young lad “your sev coe arn’t thee” Bugger me if he didn’t say no, I’m Craig Whyte and I’d like to give thee £25k. Now not wanting to offend t’young lad I said “wonderful, as soon as we get it I’ll donate it t’charity. Oh and can thee send £137.5k to my friend Imran.” So nothing dodgy at all appened and that’s truth ah tell thee. Can I go now”


  5. McCaig`s Tower says:
    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 14:02

    Yes the details would be interesting. I would also suggest contacting Ian Fraser, Ian has an interest in all things Masterton, amongst many other players in the banking fiasco. A saga which makes rangers look like good corporate citizens. A piece about Mr Masterton’s stadia business is below

    http://www.ianfraser.org/keane%e2%80%99s-last-stand/


  6. RM going a wee bit nuts with Chico news on Beeb,St M and RC say no to reconstruction,I havn’t heard it myself. Can anyone confirm ?.


  7. scapaflow14 says:

    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 13:26

    Oh dear, things just keep getting worse, now the sponsor is upset
    ……………………………………..

    Interestingly…the sponsor made the complaint to the club….the important question is…who at the club told the press?

    Come on now Jim….was it you?


  8. paulmac2 says:
    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 14:26

    scapaflow14 says:

    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 13:26

    Oh dear, things just keep getting worse, now the sponsor is upset
    ……………………………………..

    Interestingly…the sponsor made the complaint to the club….the important question is…who at the club told the press? Come on now Jim….was it you?
    ————————————————————————

    Unlike Rangers, Tennents have an excellent media & press department which knows what it’s doing. I have absolutely no doubt that Tennents released the press release 🙂


  9. Was out of touch yesterday, but have to say great post, HP, on Ogilvie. Seriously, if any MSM journalists DO read this, this sort of simply laid out list of questions to ask/investigate is what you should follow up on…..now. What are you looking at instead of this overarching question?


  10. You couldn’t make this up 🙂

    Chris McLaughlin ‏@BBCchrismclaug 5m
    BBC learns Charles Green and Imran Ahmad are compiling a dossier for police to make claim of blackmail against Craig Whyte. #Rangers


  11. Now BBC reporting that Green is to pass a ‘dossier’ to the police alleging blackmail by Whyte.

    Cant see that going far: a defence to blackmail is easy in Whyte’s case as he would clearly have reasonable grounds to BELIEVE he has a share in the assets of RIFC seeing as he has paid 125k too Green and co…

    Law on blackmail includes this:

    Under s.21 (1) Theft Act 1968, for the purposes of blackmail, a demand with menaces is unwarranted unless the person making the demand believes both:

    (a) that they had reasonable grounds for making the demand and

    (b) that the use of menaces is a proper means of reinforcing the demand.

    It is the defendant’s belief that matters, not whether in fact they are entitled to the money or property demanded.

    —-

    This story is truly the gift that keeps on giving….


  12. Chris McLaughlin ‏@BBCchrismclaug 13m

    BBC learns Charles Green and Imran Ahmad are compiling a dossier for police to make claim of blackmail against Craig Whyte. #Rangers


  13. Remember this 😉

    corsica says:
    20/07/2012 at 11:07 pm

    Well that’s that, I have now officially retired and all thanks to this blog! Right, enough moping…

    Wee question for you all: what do Charles Green, Craig Whyte, Dave King and Andrew Ellis all have in common?
    That’s right they all own property and have investments in the Republic of South Africa. What a coincidence, eh?

    What’s that I hear? You would like another coincidence? Well, okay, how about they have all at various times
    threatened to sue each other and other players in this farce but curiously not a single writ has been delivered.
    Ask your uncle Max (Clifford) about that little deflection trick…

    Another coincidence? How about they were all in Switzerland this week?

    As my grandson’s favourite comedian would say “what are the chances of that?”
    ……………………………………………………

    I look forward to hearing more of Craig’s recordings because having invested in the technology why would he not use it on his wee trip to Switzerland


  14. torrejohnbhoy at 11.38:
    Can anyone remember offhand if there was any tie-up with Rafat Ali Rizvi and Orlit Investments?
    _________

    Yes, Orlit is part of Rizvi’s group of companies based in Singapore.
    Directors include Rizvi’s sidekick Chan Fook Meng and Rizvi’s wife.
    But the allegation by Sevco that it had received “fake” invoices from Orlit suggests either that Whyte has an involvement or that Green and Rizvi have fallen out.


  15. Brian McHugh (@pbmchugh) says:
    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 15:05

    Compiling a dossier is not the same as handing one over, bit like considering legal action. Also, the Police have an annoying habit of following the evidence, Potential own goal here.


  16. No wonder Brendas clock has exploded. This is like last summer all over again. can we open a book on how long the circus will stay open?


  17. HP
    good posts in last 24hrs. Any investigation into alleged unlawful financial assistance would look at role of directors in 3-6 months preceeding alleged offence and also role if any of influential shareholders.

    So Murray, Johnston and Paul Murray etc. will all be under scrutiny. They have more to lose from this weeks raids. That is where Whyte’s recordings may come in handy.


  18. Are events likely to move up a gear soon?

    Celtic Underground‏@celticrumours44m
    Hearing whispers that arrests likely as a consequence of the initial sale of rangers. That’s arrests plural. Not just one individual.

    Phil MacGiollaBhain‏@Pmacgiollabhain26m
    @celticrumours correct

    Not much reading between the lines in this exchange.


  19. So, whilst I’ve been out:

    1) They’re still no’ deid.

    2) Traynor has rung the ever-gullible Chris McLaughlin and planted a story about the ‘compilation of a dossier’ with evidence that Whytey is blackmailing Chas n’ Imran. Oh look, a squirrel.

    Wasting Police time is still an offence, is it not? Never mind, I expect the Polis will be paying one or two peeps a wee visit soontimes and it won’t be to discuss dossiers of ‘evidence’. Enjoy the other type of big hoose, boys.


  20. As some posters have suggested, it is instructive to, from time to time, take a wee step back from this to have a good look. We should step out of the room for a while to rid ourselves of the MSM-led cognitive estrangement that has led to the mass suspension of disbelief necessary to maintain sanity.

    When you live with a smell for long enough, your senses don’t register it anymore, but when you leave the room to return a while later, the stink can be overwhelming.

    I think many of us have lived with this malodour for so long, that we don’t really appreciate just how rotten the smell is.

    HP’s post earlier today is the equivalent of stepping outside the room for a while. The more I read through it, the whiffier it became. Humming in fact.

    It outraged me once more in a week where I thought I could never be moved to outrage again.

    If HP’s list is simply a series of coincidences, then the monkey sat at his typewriter will surely win next year’s Nobel Prize for Literature. Presumably Keith Jackson will be runner-up?


  21. Chris McLaughlin ‏@BBCchrismclaug 2m
    Craig Whyte on blackmail claims: must be first blackmail in history where person making allegation has actually received money. #Rangers


  22. Is it possible Mr Whyte is sitting by the pool in Monaco, a breezy 18C today, reading this blog?

    “Chris McLaughlin ‏@BBCchrismclaug 2m
    Craig Whyte on blackmail claims: must be first blackmail in history where person making allegation has actually received money. ”

    This is just too much fun 🙂


  23. TDFB says:
    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 15:19

    21

    0

    Rate This

    Remember this 😉

    corsica says:
    20/07/2012 at 11:07 pm

    Well that’s that, I have now officially retired and all thanks to this blog! Right, enough moping…

    Wee question for you all: what do Charles Green, Craig Whyte, Dave King and Andrew Ellis all have in common?
    That’s right they all own property and have investments in the Republic of South Africa. What a coincidence, eh?

    What’s that I hear? You would like another coincidence? Well, okay, how about they have all at various times
    threatened to sue each other and other players in this farce but curiously not a single writ has been delivered.
    Ask your uncle Max (Clifford) about that little deflection trick…

    Another coincidence? How about they were all in Switzerland this week?

    As my grandson’s favourite comedian would say “what are the chances of that?”
    ……………………………………………………

    I look forward to hearing more of Craig’s recordings because having invested in the technology why would he not use it on his wee trip to Switzerland
    ———————————————————————————–
    ————————————————————————————-

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

    I’m sure I’m not alone in missing corsica’s erudite contributions. Maybe we should have a ‘corsica comment of the week’ feature.

    My vote for first award to Humble Pie for his excellent contribution today!


  24. I suspect the blackmail dossier will appear about as quickly as the Dallas Cowboys email.


  25. arabest1 says:
    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 16:49

    Would an appropriate prize for the ‘corsica comment of the week’ feature, be a bottle of Avon skin so soft midgie spray 🙂


  26. bangordub says:

    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 16:28

    Shares are now in freefall. 65.5p down 5p from open this morning.
    …………………………………

    That is a big fall in one day….


  27. According to PMcG, emergency board meeting now in session at Ibrokes. Also asking if AIM have been made aware – any truth in all this or is it kite-flying?


  28. mooby1 says:

    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 16:48

    Question re share’s…who the hell is buying them???
    ………………………

    The trades have generally not been of a significant amount…therefore they could be movements between spivs to hold a value….or it could be fans cashing small amounts and gettng their cash back via the club in the shape of an investor…

    From memory there was something about a Company must buy its shares if they are offered back to the company (I could be wrong) need to look it up again….or that maybe if they are suspensed..

    Worth a check…


  29. parmahamster says:

    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 17:18

    According to PMcG, emergency board meeting now in session at Ibrokes. Also asking if AIM have been made aware – any truth in all this or is it kite-flying?
    ………………………………………………………….

    It is the correct MO (markets now shut) for a company that wish to avoid informing the relevant regulatory authorities

    CW did similar in terms of providing reasons for things not happening…ie..the royal wedding holding up the sale of the club….its a weekend….its a bank holiday…etc etc..


  30. parmahamster says:

    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 17:18

    According to PMcG, emergency board meeting now in session at Ibrokes. Also asking if AIM have been made aware – any truth in all this or is it kite-flying?
    …………………………………………………

    The heavy fall in price….aligned with an emergency board meeting…could be a cincidence…or maybe they are deciding how much they will ask Craig Whyte to hand over in going blackmail plot…where the alleged blackmailer is not asking for cash back haning it out?


  31. mooby1 says:

    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 16:48
    ………………………….

    I guess that’s why you and I will never make through Spiv school


  32. So if Green gets the big p45….does he get to keep the history he bought or will he sell it back to the club?

    A bit like the Aussie who sold London Bridge to a Yank? (can we say yank?)


  33. parmahamster says:
    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 17:18

    Don’t know, but given Malcolm Murray’s reputation for following the rules, would be surprised to say the least, if I’s were not dotted and t’s crossed


  34. mooby1 says:
    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 16:48

    Question re share’s…who the hell is buying them???

    ___________________________________________

    Punters who sold short and are buying to cover?


  35. Oh Dear

    “http://local.stv.tv/glasgow/221247-rangers-chief-charles-green-appointed-craig-whyte-to-sevco-5088/”


  36. scapaflow14 says:
    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 18:03

    Oh Dear

    “http://local.stv.tv/glasgow/221247-rangers-chief-charles-green-appointed-craig-whyte-to-sevco-5088/”
    paulsatim says:

    hahahahhahahahahaaaaaa


  37. Wrt the planned Board meeting before the Clyde game.

    And assuming that Green is not choosing to leave just now…

    How about he takes a leave of absence, as his recent media outbursts have ‘clearly demonstrated’ that the pressure of saving TRFC is getting to him – and he really needs a break ?

    In the meantime, perhaps Stockbridge could cover for him ?

    Without anyone, [i.e Charlie, Murray or NED’s], having to make a hard decision;
    – it buys time
    – it keeps Green onside
    – it keeps options open
    &
    – ultimately, it shows the SFA that TRFC is taking some immediate action – and this could perhaps help bolster the club’s eventual, flimsy defence of “we where duped” by Green ?


  38. StevieBC says:
    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 18:10

    How about he takes a leave of absence, as his recent media outbursts have ‘clearly demonstrated’ that the pressure of saving TRFC is getting to him – and he really needs a break ?

    —————————————————————————————————————

    If he has a health breakdown he can resign and immediately sell his shares as the lock-in would lift. Still needs to get a buyer but if he goes low enough he’ll shift them – don’t know about the rest right enough.


  39. new word in the English language , FAPPER, Its a person who passes a fit and proper person test only to turn out to be a completely unsuitable person to hold a professional position.


  40. LTL

    Pennies dropping on Clyde SSB…

    Think so its like listening to kids just realising Santa does not exist

    Its embarrassing


  41. I think its fair to say that this wasn’t in the plan.

    Would imagine Police Scotland, BDO, AIM, IPA will all get involved now.

    The SFA will do nothing other than launch an independent inquiry which will find Rangers guilty of associating with Whyte but impose no meaningful penalty, again.


  42. the SFA will fine the old club again. Those that govern football in Scotland have managed to get every decision wrong regarding TRFC so far.


  43. Who could have guessed?

    Look forward to a lengthy SFA inquiry then a £2k fine.


  44. Does this give the SFA the clarity they sought, that Charles Green lied to them in order to obtain a football licence.


  45. the 3 monkeys – see no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil. Does that not remind you of the 3 people who are supposed to lead our game.


  46. Folk beginning to wise up: (From FF)

    “Quote:
    Originally Posted by griegmiester View Post
    “Duff and Phelps made a binding agreement with Sevco 5088 not Sevco Scotland, but ended up selling to Sevco Scotland. There must have been some assignation of rights from Sevco 5088 to Sevco Scotland. Ergo who formed Sevco 5088 is extremely relevant. The agreement covered both a successful CVA and an asset buyout. ”

    This, unfortunately, is the bottom line. Although title to the assets was never taken by Sevco 5088, that was the company with the contractual right to purchase them.

    Sevco 5088 must have either assigned that right to or nominated Sevco Scotland Ltd to take the title. Either way, it is overly simplistic to say that because Sevco 5088 never took title, Whyte’s involvement in that company is irrelevant.

    I’ll wait and see what Green/the club’s response to this is, but on any view – even if it does all turn out to have been a ploy to string Whyte along for a bit – Green has lied and misled us.

    I find it increasingly difficult to see how he can remain our CEO.

    The one shaft of light is that even in the tapes produced by Whyte there was reference to his involvement being subject to CVA.

    It is just about possible that this director’s appointment form was produced to him as part of the overall deal “to be held as undelivered” unless a CVA were agreed, and Whyte is going back on this. Just about… “


  47. Tip of the Iceberg so far methinks or is that
    Icebergs?
    The `unsinkable` ship ibrox not slowing down in the fog [or posting lookouts]


  48. Will Green become the new Whyte ?

    It never ceases to amaze me how keen the MSM are to ‘personalise’ these corporate crimes and focus the public’s attention and anger on a ‘lone gunman’ (e.g. Mr Fred Goodwin), rather than ever consider the very real possibility of a conspiracy ?

    Maybe it’s just me ?


  49. If Green was lying through his teeth during the infamous 5 way agreement negotiations, where does this leave the associate membership of the SFL issued to Sevco? It must surely be illegitimate, having been granted based on a web of deceit. The SFA membership transfer from Rangers to The Rangers must be illegitimate also, for the same reason. If this is the case, were the The Rangers players registrations for this season legitimate?
    Andy Bryson could be a busy boy over the next few days..

    Regan, Doncaster and Longmuir. Dear oh dear oh dear. What have you done?


  50. I think there is a serious possibility that someone has burst into the room and bumped into the table where the house of cards rests.

    Reminds me of the unsurpassed 80s TV comedy Whoops Apocalypse! where the Soviet President, bound to a wheelchair whilst munching salt, dies every hour so, his body wheeled away whilst an exact replica is wheeled in.

    Who will be next in the Big Hoose wheelchair?


  51. Seen on cqn

    As someone who knows HEE HAW marjorie daw about business dealings ,
    But i can remember reading on the brilliant RTC at the time that CW sold the corpse of RFC to
    C G.
    That for CW to have any legal claim on assets of said corpse in any shape or form any company that came out of the death of RFC,
    HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD to be TWICE removed from what CW sold CG :)).

    SOOOOOOOOOOOOO RFC to TRFC (once)
    TRFC to Sevco 5088 (twice)
    Sevso 5088 to sevco Scotland (sign here craig job done)
    Thats before TRIFC was born.
    Any business heads remember anything about this clause or am I just imagining this :))


  52. scapaflow14 says:
    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 18:49

    Folk beginning to wise up: (From FF)
    ——

    Conversely, RM still pretty much have it all down as a timmy (via the Lawwell-controlled MSM)conspiracy. Plus it’s all in the past and can’t affect what they’re doing now. Plus Sevco 5088 never had anything to do with anything – and, anyway, Mr Green would have had to speak to Mr Whyte because the latter owned the club after all. And there can’t be any such Companies House document because it should have been registered within 14 days (spivs, of course, play by the rules).

    Some surprises in store for those lovely chaps, methinks.


  53. 61patrick says:
    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 19:06

    RFC to TRFC (once)
    TRFC to Sevco 5088 (twice)
    Sevso 5088 to sevco Scotland (sign here craig job done)
    ——

    Shurely …

    RFC to Sevco Scotland (once).
    Sevco Scotland change name to TRFC.
    TRFC become subsidiary of RIFC plc

    RIFC have the (dwindling) cash.

    (Someone bought 20K shares at half past four. Wonder why?)


  54. 61patrick says:
    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 19:06

    RFC to TRFC (once)
    TRFC to Sevco 5088 (twice)
    Sevso 5088 to sevco Scotland (sign here craig job done)

    ——

    Shurely …

    RFC to Sevco Scotland (once)

    … and that’s it.

    The Sevco 5088 deal with subsequesnt transfer to Sevco Scotland would have given an extra step of remove – but apparently that didn’t happen.


  55. Bollocks. Sorry for slightly differently worded double post … the first one didn’t show up after a couple of refreshes so I did it again. 🙂


  56. “The Sevco 5088 deal with subsequesnt transfer to Sevco Scotland would have given an extra step of remove – but apparently that didn’t happen”

    why don’t stv say who it was that told them that it did, for the avoidance of doubt as it were.


  57. “The Sevco 5088 deal with subsequesnt transfer to Sevco Scotland would have given an extra step of remove – but apparently that didn’t happen”

    why don’t stv say who it was that told them, for the avoidance of doubt, that it did.


  58. I have SSB on the laptop right now.

    Not something i’ve abused my ears with living down in England.

    What a load of misinformed nonsense.

    Think i’ll switch my attention back to C4 for some real news.


  59. angus1983 says:
    Friday, April 12, 2013 at 19:12

    (Someone bought 20K shares at half past four. Wonder why?)

    __________________________________________

    As explained earlier, it can be a short seller buying to cover his position.

Comments are closed.