Fair Play at FIFA?

ByTrisidium

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.

About the author

Trisidium administrator

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

4,057 Comments so far

Danish PastryPosted on7:34 pm - Mar 19, 2013


Rangers tax case ‘confidential leaks’ investigated by police

http://local.stv.tv/glasgow/218252-rangers-tax-case-confidential-leaks-investigated-by-police/

Now someone putting the truth out into the public domain, that needs to be stopped.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on7:35 pm - Mar 19, 2013


Auldheid (@Auldheid) says:
Tuesday, March 19, 2013 at 19:14

The Rangers survival depends on a belief that not only is further administration not a possibility but that they will be in the market for better players (who will at least cost the same) and club licensing will tell the SFA if the business model being pursued by The Rangers is sensible and sustainable.

They probably will issue a licence but to protect themselves, if they have any sense, the SFA will make it conditional on balancing the books.
======================

The simple fact is that TRFC can’t realistically balance the books. They might promise to, but it isn’t going to happen. They would have to cut costs by at least £1m a month to break even. All of that has to come from salaries. They have given big money contracts to some seriously duff players who they can’t get rid of. They have an even more seriously duff manager, who can’t be ditched for emotional reasons. So how can it be done? And how about that £10m war chest, to let Ally buy some more duff budgies on big wages? That’s a firm promise to the bears, remember. I wouldn’t like to be in Green’s shoes if he reneges on that.

Balancing the books is a concept that is no longer in the DNA of Rangers. They will spend themselves into oblivion, they will damage a lot of other clubs on the way, and the SFA will simply stand by and let it happen. That is their idea of governance.

View Comment

carlisleceltPosted on7:36 pm - Mar 19, 2013


Mark Guidi on SSB in answer to a fan who says there will be thousands leave the Scottish game if Rangers are fastracked, his reply they do not matter.

View Comment

BrendaPosted on7:52 pm - Mar 19, 2013


carlislecelt @ 19:36

Guidi along with a few others on the SSB panel are hell bent on sevco getting fast-tracked to the SPL?? The poll tonight was ‘should sevco get fast-tracked to the SPL?

Result yes 38%. No 62%

View Comment

pau1mart1nPosted on7:55 pm - Mar 19, 2013


wonder how many times keevins voted ?
i’d guess 30 ish.

View Comment

ekbhoyPosted on8:02 pm - Mar 19, 2013


carlislecelt says:

Tuesday, March 19, 2013 at 19:36

I would expect that everything Guidi states is designed to increase sales of his newspaper and folk tuning into RC, so almost everything he states can either be ignored or laughed at.

Disgraceful from an ex-Celtic Boys Club goalkeeper, still the mortagage needs to be paid, mouths to feed, pension contributions to sort out ……. explains the illogical and frankly ever increasing desparation from the MSM………… I just chortle whenever confronted with this type of drivel.

View Comment

timalloy67Posted on8:04 pm - Mar 19, 2013


Correction from Charles Green, next year a Rangers DOLTS team will feature in the lower leagues.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on8:18 pm - Mar 19, 2013


neepheid says:

Tuesday, March 19, 2013 at 19:35
++++++++++++++++++++++
Possibly but the more supporters know about the principles behind these rules and how they affect their clubs, i.e the better informed they are, the more difficult it becomes for the SFA to avoid the consequences of mis or not applying them.

It is a form of transparency and already the fact that we know the rules and they know that we know is impacting on the rules themselves. Observed behaviour changes just by being observed.

Apart from that the SFA are not that daft.

For example this is a new one on Transparency.

2.6 Confidentiality and Transparency

The Scottish FA guarantees the clubs full confidentiality as regards all non-public information disclosed during the Licensing Process.

However and without prejudice to the foregoing generality, each club hereby expressly consents to the Scottish FA notifying the club’s respective league body of any failure to obtain a licence and the reasons for that failure.

This ====> Furthermore, the financial information as detailed in Section 8.12 of Part 2 of this Manual with the exception of the net debt information will be made freely available to members of the public via the Scottish FA website.<===== 😉

The Scottish FA also reserves the right to disclose any award decision at any time. Subject to the disclosure to the club’s respective league body referred to above, the reasons for such decisions however will remain confidential. The Licensing Administration will adhere to the following guidelines:
#The Scottish FA has concluded a confidentiality agreement with each club. This will be updated as and when necessary;
# Members of the Licensing Committee, the Appellate Tribunal and any other individual engaged by the Licensor in the Licensing process must sign a confidentiality agreement before starting his or her tasks. Licensing Administration employees are subject to confidentiality provisions in terms of their employment contracts;
#The level at which an award is presented to a club (overall and under each criteria heading) will be made available for general consumption via the Scottish FA website.

The part of making certain information public is I believe a result of the SFA being misled by Rangers in the past. It protects the SFA from being misled by clubs and provides supporters with information they can use to make their own minds up about the financial well being of their clubs.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on8:24 pm - Mar 19, 2013


carlislecelt says:
Tuesday, March 19, 2013 at 19:36

Mark Guidi on SSB in answer to a fan who says there will be thousands leave the Scottish game if Rangers are fastracked, his reply they do not matter.
==================================================

Guidi merely echoes the majority view of the Scottish media. The well being of one club and its supporters are the only thing that matters. Rangers dominating the Scottish game means gushing newspaper articles and sycophantic pundits galore on the phone-ins meaning plenty of happy clappers will want to read and listen. Throw in negativity about Celtic in equal measure and the package is complete.

View Comment

justshateredPosted on8:24 pm - Mar 19, 2013


With regards to the investigation into the leaking of information regarding Rangers Tax Case:
Was the story newsworthy?
Yes.
Was the story in the public interest?
Yes.
Was the story true?
Yes.

And there is the problem for the authorities. The more truth is told the worse it becomes for them.
While there is a degree of professionalism expected from everyone in public office there is also a point where the public deserve to know how a bank, that collapses and requires the public to bail it out, can loan £750M pounds to one company. To quote someone “We deserve to know……”.

The same professionalism should also apply to other bodies such as the people charged with governing our sport. That has been sadly absent as well.

View Comment

jonnyodPosted on8:41 pm - Mar 19, 2013


Heard M Guidi on SSB tonight desperately trying to convince the listeners of the need to get sevco into the SPL within 12 months
Looks like my post about CG being desperate maybe an understatement .
Something tells me the peepil in the MSM know more about Sevco’s financial situation than they are letting on .Now can someone remind me what happened to the last football club the MSM put their head in the sand about .
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

View Comment

yikirtaPosted on8:47 pm - Mar 19, 2013


This has to be said about Clyde 1 Superscoreboard…as Scottish Football pundits they are a permanent embarrassment and an occasional disgrace. This country would be a better place if Clyde 1 Superscoreboard did not exist.

View Comment

pau1mart1nPosted on8:52 pm - Mar 19, 2013


do spl/sfl chairmen listen slavishly to SSB and follow its carefully crafted subliminal messages……….
i vote “naw”.

View Comment

faza2010Posted on9:04 pm - Mar 19, 2013


It is going to happen jonyod as much as you, I and every other fair minded fan thinks that this is unpalatable.

Scottish football, imho will have to take huge steps back before it travels forward in a positive direction, we are stareing into the abyss while the Yorkie Pied Piper tries to dictate policy and influences football politics to a compliant and submissive governing body.

It has to change for goodness sake…..I teach students and I tell them as my Dad told me…..If you cheat, then you are only cheating yourself.

View Comment

angus1983Posted on9:32 pm - Mar 19, 2013


dreddybhoy – thanks, that makes some kind of sense.


Danish Pastry says:
Tuesday, March 19, 2013 at 18:42

Angus, I was listening to Graham Watson from the Pars Steering Group answer this. Among other things he said that the club had no assets, therefore there was nothing to pay creditors with. GM’s companies own the stadium which has the £12m interest-free loan attached to it (no payback necessary until 2043, and then, still without interest!!). Looks like another ‘is it a club or is it a company?’ question In this case though, it’s the club that looks doomed (scratches head). He also said that GM was now willing to sell 100% of his shares to the group for £500,000. And to think Craig Whyte only got two quid for his! Problem seems to be that the £500,000 does not include the stadium.
——

That seems to raise more questions than it answers. How do DAFC have no assets? Stadiums aren’t worth much anyway. How much can East End Park be worth when Ibrox, in a prime Glasgow location, was very recently sold for around £1m by a dying club wanting to secure as much cash as possible for its many creditors?

I’m entirely with you on the head scratching bit. I thought there was now a precedent that the Club continued merrily along in the ether until someone paid a fiver for it as part of the assets of the holding company? DAFC can never die. Shurely.

And, given that there are, then, apparently no assets, I wonder how the shares can be worth £500K? It’s an awful lot of goodwill.

I wonder who’ll buy the history? Perhaps Hibs would like a Scottish Cup or two? 😉

Oh ma heid.

View Comment

smartbhoyPosted on9:39 pm - Mar 19, 2013


yikirta says:
Tuesday, March 19, 2013 at 20:47
17 0 Rate This
This has to be said about Clyde 1 Superscoreboard…as Scottish Football pundits they are a permanent embarrassment and an occasional disgrace. This country would be a better place if Clyde 1 Superscoreboard did not exist.
__________________________________________________

Yet..going by a lot of you….you still tune in. Why?

If I didn’t like a TV show….I’d not watch it.

I don’t like Radio Clyde or SSB…..So I don’t tune in..

It’s agenda has always been apparent. Would you tune in if it was called Rangers Radio and you were funding Green?

Are you all listening to it for sadistic pleasure!?!?! Turn off and soon it will vanish.

View Comment

angus1983Posted on9:45 pm - Mar 19, 2013


I was just wondering to myself whether TRFC will ever get round to holding an AGM, or whether they’re even required to, and came across this piece from the Daily Record of Feb 2 last year.

Note how many times the word “club” is used. Changed days, eh? No holding companies here.


Craig Whyte tells Rangers Supporters Trust that AGM is on hold
2 Feb 2012 00:00

RANGERS chairman Craig Whyte has insisted the club’s AGM cannot take place until the club’s accounts are signed off, according to the Rangers Supporters Trust.

The RST were last night told by Whyte the signing off is being held up by, in the Trust’s terms, “potential tax case liabilities”.

And that comes hot on the heels of Andy Kee, the Rangers Supporters Assembly Trust chairman, also asking Whyte to open up about the state of affairs at Ibrox.

The Light Blues owner was contacted by the RST about the delay in calling an AGM after Whyte had admitted borrowing money on the strength of future season-ticket sales, a revelation that caused alarm among the Rangers support.

Trading in shares in Rangers was suspended last month after a delay in publishing the club’s audited accounts.

The Govan club are waiting on a tax tribunal verdict concerning payments made to staff in benefit trusts before Whyte bought out Sir David Murray last May and the case could cost the club up to £49million.

Gordon Dinnie, chair of the RST, contacted Whyte urging him to “publicly clarify the situation both for shareholders and the wider Rangers support”.

And a statement on the RST website said: “Mr Whyte has stated that the AGM can’t take place until the club accounts are signed off and that challenges around the potential tax case liabilities mean these continue to be worked on.

“He stated that as soon as the accounts are signed off an AGM will be called.”

View Comment

hangerheadPosted on9:56 pm - Mar 19, 2013


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21852392

Police to probe alleged leaks of Rangers’ tax details

Police are investigating the alleged leaking of confidential information about the Rangers tax case, following a complaint by Sir David Murray.
The former Rangers chairman had instructed his lawyers to submit a complaint to the Crown Office over the publication of his tax affairs.
Strathclyde Police officers will determine whether private details were released in breach of the law.
Rangers “oldco” won the so-called Big Tax Case last year.
Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs had claimed that the company formerly running Rangers, now being liquidated, had used the Employee Benefit Trusts scheme illegally in making £47.65m in payments to players and staff in the form of tax-free loans from 2001 to 2010.
Rangers disputed the bill and a First Tier Tax Tribunal (FTT) ruled that the payments were loans that can be repaid .
HMRC has lodged an appeal against the FTT’s decision.
Sir David’s legal advisors, the firm Levy & McRae, said in a statement: “He has asked that this matter is investigated and that anyone found guilty of breaching the law is the subject of prosecution.”
A police spokeswoman said on Tuesday: “Following instructions from the Crown Office, an investigation is ongoing into the circumstances surrounding the alleged leaking of confidential information relating to the Rangers tax case.
“It would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.”

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on10:05 pm - Mar 19, 2013


hangerhead says:

Tuesday, March 19, 2013 at 21:56
_________________________________

Sir David has a neck of brass. If he was so confident of winning the tax case why sell his club? What difference did the leaks make to the FTT result?
Or did the leaks expose CW to such an extent the grand plan to get Rangers out of debt virtually unscathed came unstuck?

I do hope the UTT finds for HMRC just so that they can make that charlatan chancer Murray accountable.

View Comment

ShooperbPosted on10:50 pm - Mar 19, 2013


Auldheid (@Auldheid) says:

Tuesday, March 19, 2013 at 22:05

Had he not been trying to sell the club since about 2005, before the tax case was on the horizon? He couldn’t sell it for years before the tax case was known, and yet it’s the fault of the tax case that he couldn’t sell it?!?? How does that one work?

View Comment

WeeBullyPosted on11:03 pm - Mar 19, 2013


Replying to angus1983 at 21:45

‘Necessity is the mother of invention’ perhaps covers this holding company nonsense.

Which perhaps leads to

“It’s always amazing to me to hear an intelligent, articulate, rational person come to an absurd conclusion. This usually results when starting with an incorrect premise.” – Paul Moser III (who?)

The premise here being that Rangers can never be liquidated.

I see in that BBC report above that “Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs had claimed that the company formerly running Rangers,…” Incredible. Say it often enough eh.

‘mon the whistleblowers! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_whistleblowers.

View Comment

Carntyne Riddrie (@Riddrie)Posted on11:06 pm - Mar 19, 2013


yourhavingalaugh says:
Sunday, March 17, 2013 at 21:02
==========================

You’re havin’ a laugh!

View Comment

carlisleceltPosted on11:10 pm - Mar 19, 2013


BBC2 Scotland just now. The Chief of Police he is a bloody disgrace.

View Comment

smartbhoyPosted on11:15 pm - Mar 19, 2013


https://www.spreaker.com/show/glasgow_radio_online

24mins in he has Sandaza on the phone.

His contract £4.5k rising annually £5.5k..£6.5k and then £10k per week on a four year contract.

No wonder Green is trying every trick in the book to get out of Div3.

How many other players contracts are similar.

He has no chance of moving any of these players on.

There’s absolutely no chance any of the players they signed in August are going to get the same wages anywhere else.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on12:05 am - Mar 20, 2013


Clyde is an unashamed cheerleader for all things Ibrox. As bad as SSB can be though, I still hear good callers getting through. But Sportsound tonight was very good indeed with the line-up of John Brown and Spiers. Straight-talking Brown still not willing to endorse Green.

View Comment

BunionPosted on1:53 am - Mar 20, 2013


Following the Communities Cup Final and St Mirren’s fabulous win (well done the buddies!) it really struck home to me how much we have veered from watching football for the sheer unadulterated joy of simply watching a GOOD football game.

Hell mend David Murray, Rangers, the SFA, Sevco/TRFC (delete as applicable), and the SPL for that particular crime.

Kudos to Danny Lennon, Tommy Craig and the St Mirren team for reminding us of the joy that football can provide.

As for Rangers/TRFC being ‘saviours of the game’? My hairy crack!

It’s quite obvious now that they are nothing more than parasites.

View Comment

ptd1978Posted on2:15 am - Mar 20, 2013


All of a sudden they’re happy to use the phrase “Rangers tax case” on the BBC having found ways to call it anything else for years previously.
If I was Mark Daly, I’d be more than a bit put out that some lackey in BBC Scotland saw fit try and insinuate who my source was when reporting this.

View Comment

Grant King (@Sprotson)Posted on7:31 am - Mar 20, 2013


Are Rangers offering a bribe in order to get the Colts idea progressed?

Some posters on here have suggested that the offer to but tickets is a bribe and I can understand why. BUt the offer is not only open to clubs who vote in favour, it applies to all clubs in the bottom division regardless how they vote.

How is this different to the new distribution model that would be in place if the overall vote for reconstruction is a yes.

Both in my eyes are a consequence of voting yes, not an inducement to do so.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on8:07 am - Mar 20, 2013


jonnyod says:
Tuesday, March 19, 2013 at 20:41

Heard M Guidi on SSB tonight desperately trying to convince the listeners of the need to get sevco into the SPL within 12 months. Looks like my post about CG being desperate maybe an understatement . Something tells me the peepil in the MSM know more about Sevco’s financial situation than they are letting on.
—————————————————————————————————————

I think it would be a mistake to believe that all journalists want Rangers back in the top tier for the sake of Rangers. The vast majority of sports journos want them there because it makes their job easier – it’s a helluva lot easier to fill the back pages.

It also suits the newspaper management, who are facing a circulation collapse. They want to try and keep both sets of fans onboard buying the paper but that means trying to establish a balance of some sort. That’s much easier to maintain with both of them in the same league and the fact that one is now at the bottom and the other at the top of Scottish football makes it all but impossible.

And perhaps Rangers fans are enjoying their journey – although I think that is wearing thin for many – but I know that MSM sports journos won’t be enjoying trips to the hinterland of Scotland into very basic grounds and facilities. It’s just not glamorous and not what these carrots signed up for.

As to them being aware of Rangers financial situation I doubt it and even if they were they wouldn’t understand it. Sports journos in Scotland are spoon fed their info and I can’t actually remember the last time one of broke an actual exclusive story that wasn’t fed by an agent trying to tout an over the hill player.

I think only Green and Stockbridge understand the true financial position at Ibrox although Malcolm Murray may well have gained some inkling and I would think that’s what lies behind the recent spat. But you’re right Green is desperate with two things uppermost in his mind: He must keep Rangers trading till he can sell his shares and get out and he must defend the share prices because very 1p the shares drop costs him £50,000. He has actually lost approx £1 million since the shares price high of 94p in early January. If I was Charlie I would be desperate as well wondering how much was going to be left when I reached the finishing line.

But, of course, I wouldn’t want to allege that Charles was nothing more than a money-grubbing CEO as he has publicly stated that his Rangers shares will be left for his grandchildren.

We know he is subject to a lock-in for his 5+ million shares but that wouldn’t apply if he had to leave the club on health grounds – I don’t know if he would keep his shares if he was dismissed by the Board before then although that is seldom what happens when a quoted company CEO goes as it has to appear amicable or the share price nosedives – so an ‘amicable’ settlement is usually agreed.

View Comment

youcantbuyhistoryPosted on8:30 am - Mar 20, 2013


If the fools in charge now managed to put sevco in the top tier ,for the vast majority of us the game would be a bogey ,yeh we know guidi and his ilk wouldn’t care a jot. Charles green wouldn’t have to spend a penny on players because sevco would be the only club who couldn’t get relegated.dear me I can hear him bleating now”I know we finished bottom but i was talking to some european club chairmen just the other day and they are of the opinion that we are essential to scottish football you can’t relegate us you would be making scottish football the laughing stock of world football”my advice to the place maker of sevco is if you do this just before you get the bonus and golden handshake (who knows there might be a wee ebt in it for you as well) then don’t stop there go the whole hog.why don’t you have sevco and Celtic (if you must) in the top tier along with Liverpool ,man utd Newcastle’s etc representitive colt sides.this should get a decent t.v deal.all other scottish sides would drop down to a giant mega diddy division 1 and we could all watch scottish football sink.i would bet I could get more than one hopeless powerbroker to at least try and push this through for 30 prices of silver,names anyone.has Gordon smith found a job yet?

View Comment

borussiabeefburgPosted on8:35 am - Mar 20, 2013


One story from three different Scottish newspapers over the past 24 hours has been reported in a very similar style. None of the reports has a by-line. All three emphasise the ex-existence of a ‘former Rangers club’.

“The former Rangers club known as “Oldco” was investigated last year over its use of Employee Benefit Trusts (EBTs).”

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/confidential-leaks-relating-rangers-tax-1773676

“The former Rangers club, known as Oldco, was investigated last year over its use of EBTs.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/rangers-tax-leak-probe.20561620

“The former Rangers club known as “Oldco” was investigated last year over its use of Employee Benefit Trusts (EBTs).”

http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/top-stories/rangers-tax-leak-probed-by-police-1-2845555

Am I correct in my assumption that these reports probably weren’t written by Scottish sports journalists?

View Comment

angus1983Posted on8:53 am - Mar 20, 2013


borussiabeefburg says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 08:35

Yep, the stuff of lazy journalism – the regurgitated “Press Release” 🙂

(You’d be surprised the sort of nonsense you can get printed in the papers simply by circulating a press release. Mr Green is obviously fully aware of this. Even better to do it in electronic form, where they can just cut and paste (which originally meant slicing up the galley of text and sticking it on a page layout with cow-gum) without bothering to read it too closely.)

View Comment

ianagainPosted on8:55 am - Mar 20, 2013


http://www.101greatgoals.com/blog/rangers-striker-francisco-sandaza-duped-by-a-celtic-fan-pretending-to-be-mls-agent/

Nice one Tommy. I do love it when the I always wanted to play for “x” brigade are outed.

View Comment

rantinrobinPosted on8:56 am - Mar 20, 2013


From the BBC website

‘Bomber ‘ Brown on how to negate the influence of Gareth Bale when we play Wales

“Well, do you know what you do; with the pace that he’s got and the close control – he can’t run without legs,” Brown told BBC Radio Scotland.

I am sure Marke Wotte, Performance Director for the SFA will be reassured to note BB’s remarkable and sophisticated tactical approach to the game. And he has a badge!

We can also feel gratified that the pending Hampden meetings to decide the future of Scottish football will be co-ordinated by such an adept trio of administrators.

In the last year all three have made decisions which can best be described as remarkable, and breathtaking.

View Comment

angus1983Posted on9:00 am - Mar 20, 2013


Bunion says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 01:53

My hairy crack! It’s quite obvious now that they are nothing more than parasites.
——

Thank you for that mental image at this time of the morning, Bunion.

View Comment

angus1983Posted on9:08 am - Mar 20, 2013


Grant King (@Sprotson) says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 07:31

Both in my eyes are a consequence of voting yes, not an inducement to do so.
——

I think you’re avoiding the point, Grant.

Do you not think the fact that Mr Green has promised to hand out brown envelopes if he gets his way would influence the decision making process of persons who would vote on letting his TRFC bairns team into the league? It appears to be a barely disguised inducement to vote a given way.

The whole issue, of course, is a nonsense.

What I would like to know is where he intends to get a first team from. His current side are surely the inexperienced, fairly hopeless and inept kids team who have just about found their level in Div 3?

View Comment

Grant King (@Sprotson)Posted on9:16 am - Mar 20, 2013


angus1983 says

I think you’re avoiding the point, Grant.

Do you not think the fact that Mr Green has promised to hand out brown envelopes if he gets his way would influence the decision making process of persons who would vote on letting his TRFC bairns team into the league? It appears to be a barely disguised inducement to vote a given way.

The whole issue, of course, is a nonsense.

What I would like to know is where he intends to get a first team from. His current side are surely the inexperienced, fairly hopeless and inept kids team who have just about found their level in Div 3?

I think u are muddying the waters by describing the offer as handing out brown envelopes,

I agree that some clubs may vote in favour of colts as a result of this offer, however my point is that the same clubs are being offered money as part of the redistribution model and may vote based on that.

I do not see the difference between these offers. To call one a bride, then you need to call the other one too.

Not that it matters, but I do not agree with the colt idea, as you quite clearly stated, rangers have enough to worry about re the quality of their current team.

View Comment

angus1983Posted on9:19 am - Mar 20, 2013


ianagain says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 08:55

Nice one Tommy. I do love it when the I always wanted to play for “x” brigade are outed.
——

General reaction over at RM is one of outraged surprise. Mr Sandaza would probably do well to leave the country swiftly.

I wonder if the bears really, genuinely were stupid enough to think that players were at Ibrox to play for the shirt in Division 3?

View Comment

tic6709Posted on9:23 am - Mar 20, 2013


ALLOA chairman Mike Mulraney has laughed off Rangers’ demand to be fast-tracked up the leagues.

Charles Green wants the Ibrox club parachuted into the second tier of the proposed 12-12-18 set-up.

Alloa are chasing promotion from the Second Division and Mulraney said: “My reaction is one of mild amusement. Wouldn’t it be lovely if we all got to dictate which league we play in next season?

“Rangers are trying to bat for what is in their interests. They are entitled to put forward their case, I am entitled to ignore it.

“Alloa won the Third Division last season. Does that mean we deserve to go up two leagues? If we win promotion we’d go up on merit. That would be fair.”

Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/leaguedivision3/4850416/Green-is-stung-by-Wasps.html#ixzz2O4Pp7JIe

View Comment

angus1983Posted on9:23 am - Mar 20, 2013


Grant King (@Sprotson) says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 09:16

I do not see the difference between these offers. To call one a bride, then you need to call the other one too.
——

I see your point. It’s all financial inducement in an attempt to get their way. And yeah, the brown envelope thing was a bit disingenuous.

However – redistribution of income by the organising body is arguably a bit different from a single club offering to hand over cash to all other clubs. The former at least makes an attempt to appear above board.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on9:36 am - Mar 20, 2013


angus1983 says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 09:19

General reaction over at RM is one of outraged surprise. Mr Sandaza would probably do well to leave the country swiftly.

I wonder if the bears really, genuinely were stupid enough to think that players were at Ibrox to play for the shirt in Division 3?
============================

It might help if he was any good! For TRFC to have signed a dumpling on those sort of terms just brings into close focus Ally’s renowned managerial skills. So long as he’s in charge of the football side, TRFC are simply heading for embarrassment the higher up the leagues they go. And I think Green is now very well aware of that fact. It will be interesting to see how he manages to dump a Rangers legend.

View Comment

torrejohnbhoyPosted on9:46 am - Mar 20, 2013


Here’s an idea.
Could Dunfermline,the club,not just arrange to share with a local junior side meantime and let Masterertons “holding Company” go to the wall?.
The club goes on you know.Nimmo Smith said so,so it must be true.

View Comment

coineanachantaighePosted on10:09 am - Mar 20, 2013


smartbhoy says:
Tuesday, March 19, 2013 at 21:39
69 1 i
Rate This
=========================

Well said. Can I just add that although there is obviously an agenda there (on SSB and other MSM outlets) which we all know about, there is also an element of the USA radio “shock-jocks”.

“Shock-jocks” deliberately make outrageous and well OTT statements not only because their target audience are both predjudiced and dim and this appeals to them but because they know they upset a less extremist not-so-thick audience who tune into listen to the latest and be outraged by it.

They’re of course laughing all the way to the bank as their ‘enemies’ are giving them extra support by tuning in as audience figures determine cash brought in.

View Comment

pau1mart1nPosted on10:24 am - Mar 20, 2013


when is the anti hoax call legislation coming in to force ??

View Comment

coineanachantaighePosted on10:25 am - Mar 20, 2013


angus1983 says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 09:23
2 0 i Rate This

Grant King (@Sprotson) says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 09:16

However – redistribution of income by the organising body is arguably a bit different from a single club offering to hand over cash to all other clubs. The former at least makes an attempt to appear above board.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The offical body has a duty (don’t laught back there) to try to improve the situation, financial, organisationally, for its member clubs. It is working for all of them and try to get good deals for all of them (again you may laugh but this is the theoretical legal position).

A single club offering financial inducements to gain advantage for itself is a completely different situation – not to mention that its against the rules to do so, or at least is in any ofther FA in any other country.

View Comment

cosmichaggisPosted on10:28 am - Mar 20, 2013


angus1983 says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 09:23
What I would like to know is where he intends to get a first team from. His current side are surely the inexperienced, fairly hopeless and inept kids team who have just about found their level in Div 3?
===============================================
A kids team with an average age of 26 ??!!!

View Comment

dreddybhoyPosted on10:30 am - Mar 20, 2013


torrejohnbhoy says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 09:46
7 0 Rate This
Here’s an idea.
Could Dunfermline,the club,not just arrange to share with a local junior side meantime and let Masterertons “holding Company” go to the wall?.
The club goes on you know.Nimmo Smith said so,so it must be true.

===========

problem there is the sfa membership which is held by the company not the club, odd that

oh wait

the company is the club

all makes sense now

View Comment

wottpiPosted on10:34 am - Mar 20, 2013


Grant King (@Sprotson) says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 09:16

There is only one club in Scottish Football who has now twice (once officially and once unofficially from reports of CEO/supporters meetings) offered to hand money over to another club when no request has been made for recompense or any other payments.

The same way there seems to have been only one club stupid enough to make a direct call to a football manager offering him the chance of becoming a manager of another club.

There was only one club stupid enough to get involved with EBT’s then obstruct the authorities in thier investigations.

There was only one club who decided they didn’t need to pass on relevant information to the footballing authorities.

There is only one club who has supported a fan boycott thus reducing the potential income not only to themselves but to a fellow member club.

And you wonder why people question the clubs motives when they offer cash ‘for nothing’ to other member clubs.

The redistibution of league monies is a total different kettle of fish.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on10:51 am - Mar 20, 2013


Update on ‘Colts thread’ from Bears Den

only 44 replies so hardly catching anyones interest
Most saying they would only go to a few games max and would expect the entry to be included in the season tickets.

If their own fans (very small poll admittedly) aren’t interested in the prospect then why should the rest of the country give two hoots?

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on11:09 am - Mar 20, 2013


arabest1 on Monday, March 18, 2013 at 18:50
35 2 Rate This
So there we have it, colt teams the favoured cash cow of trangers, what a surprise …
————
I suppose a colt team would also be a good insurance policy if for any reason the big team became unsustainable and you had to downsize and move on.

View Comment

Carntyne Riddrie (@Riddrie)Posted on11:40 am - Mar 20, 2013


wottpi says:
Tuesday, March 19, 2013 at 13:48
===========================

It is now obvious that nothing Charles Green says can be taken seriously.

Why he says the things he does is open to question, but in my view its because he has found its the best way to keep his third division side in the sports page headlines.

View Comment

Carntyne Riddrie (@Riddrie)Posted on11:57 am - Mar 20, 2013


barcabhoy says:
Monday, March 18, 2013 at 09:05

There were signs last year , that some in the business media were getting a bit sick of being
taken for mugs by Murray. It will be interesting to see how it’s reported this year.
===============================================================

A cynic might predict business as usual.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on11:59 am - Mar 20, 2013


Carntyne Riddrie (@Riddrie) says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 11:40

Do you mean Green or Traynor or both.

Say what you like about JT but he does know what will rile up the opposition and what will get in the papers etc. Green was doing fine without him but every little helps.

The two are well matched and as you imply, if one of their tasks is to maintain a high profile for the club they are doing a splendid job and merit every penny of their high salaries and bonuses.

Afterall like Sandaza, they are only there for the money 🙂

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on12:03 pm - Mar 20, 2013


Areyouaccusingmeofmendacity.

Lets say he was trying to sell it for more than a buyer was willing to pay.
He was willing to sell it because of the debt burden it had become in its own right and on MIH.
But he was trying to sell it at a price that would reduce the debt.
No one wanted to pay whatever it was he was asking for but lets call it £50m for arguments sake.
Then in 2010 the tax case became public knowledge, yet even though he was advised Rangers would win he sold them for a penny.
That is because the tax case threat reduced the asking price to a penny.
So rather than hold on and ride out the process and possibly keep them in the SPL he bailed out or was chucked out but SDM put Rangers in jeopardy not the guy who made ebts public.
Whether ebt details were released or not the very threat they posed was caused by SDM and no one else, so I stand by my point he has a neck of brass but not apparently the courage of his convictions.

View Comment

bigsausagefingersPosted on12:35 pm - Mar 20, 2013


Anyone else feel a bit sorry for Sandaza? Interesting though that his wages go up yearly. I wonder if the likes of Black and Shields are on a similar structure. Whatever TRFC wage bill is going to go up next year. Before they even sign a player.

View Comment

ianagainPosted on12:51 pm - Mar 20, 2013


Sandaza – £234k this year rising to £520k. Stunning. Is he highest paid? (Do they actually get paid in close season?) Are their bonuses on top?
If so Ive changed my mind from thinking they will stumble their way through to predicting bankruptcy sometime towards end of next year.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on1:02 pm - Mar 20, 2013


bigsausagefingers says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 12:35

Anyone else feel a bit sorry for Sandaza?
————————————————————————————————————————-

£117k per goal.
Finding it hard to reach for the tissues 🙂

Think even the daftest of Bears know the reality is that guys like Sandaza are there for some easy money.

View Comment

spanishceltPosted on1:04 pm - Mar 20, 2013


bigsausagefingers says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 12:35

Anyone else feel a bit sorry for Sandaza? Interesting though that his wages go up yearly. I wonder if the likes of Black and Shields are on a similar structure. Whatever TRFC wage bill is going to go up next year. Before they even sign a player.
………………………………………………………………………….
Firstly I dont feel the least bit sorry for anyone (especially a diddy) who gets paid that sort of money, but the wage rise structure shows that they were CERTAIN they were getting promoted every consecutive season til they reached the spl.
Now any player they are signing on freedom of contract must be using Sandazas second season money as a starting point, this being in the public domain could have serious implications with any players they are negotiating with and even some of their existing younger players who are playing every week and being asked to sign long term contracts on I bet a lot less than a bench warmer is getting.

View Comment

rantinrobinPosted on1:13 pm - Mar 20, 2013


George ,the Choke,Osborne to clamp down on any tax avoidance schemes.He hopes to raise 2 billion as a result.
We look forward to the government’s vigorous pursuit George.

View Comment

angus1983Posted on1:14 pm - Mar 20, 2013


bigsausagefingers says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 12:35

Anyone else feel a bit sorry for Sandaza?
——
Only in the sense that a chap with the evident acumen of a carrot has been made to look incredibly stupid and greedy with great ease. Shooting fish in a barrel, mocking the afflicted etc.

Any sympathy I might have for how the guy feels today is quickly ushered out the door when I note how much cash he trousers on a weekly basis. Should someone wish to remunerate me in similar fashion, I’d not be too bothered whether anyone felt sorry for me or not. And I’m sure Mr Sandaza feels the same. Therefore, not much point wasting such an emotion on him.

View Comment

Carntyne Riddrie (@Riddrie)Posted on1:28 pm - Mar 20, 2013


blindsummit63 says:
Monday, March 18, 2013 at 18:42

No to reconstruction to fast track “Rangers”!

No to colt teams!

An end to their bullying, sneering superior condescension.

Will no-one in any position of public authority stand up to this man?
====================================================

just a wild guess, but no.

View Comment

Celtic Paranoia (@CelticParanoia)Posted on1:41 pm - Mar 20, 2013


angus1983 says:
Tuesday, March 19, 2013 at 17:50
56 0 i
Rate This

I’m not quite getting what’s different in the RFC v DAFC situations.

Both clubs owed an amount of cash to HMRC. HMRC have been granted a WUO for DAFC.

How did RFC escape this? By going into administration voluntarily?

And, if so, why didn’t DAFC pull the same stunt?

——————————————————————-

Perhaps because RFC had the brass to dispute the bill hence the FTTT. Therefore HMRC did not want to pursue a WUO whilst the amount was still in dispute.

That and DAFC’s “who are these people?” brigade is much much smaller than RFC’s

View Comment

jimlarkinPosted on2:08 pm - Mar 20, 2013


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21861941

will more police time be wasted in investigating “leaks”, or is it only investigated if it is to do with scotland’s establishment “team” ?

View Comment

FinlochPosted on2:10 pm - Mar 20, 2013


borussiabeefburg says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 08:35

One story from three different Scottish newspapers over the past 24 hours has been reported in a very similar style….(and on radio too)
It is about a police case about “Leaks” concerning SDM and the demise of Rangers FC under his stewardship, and Lawyers are mentioned too to give it gravitas.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Make no mistake – this is a professionally coordinated (pre-written) story about how there is an active police investigation into “leaks”.
Its maybe about previous whistleblowers in the text but that is not what it is about.

Maybe it is actually a warning to future whistleblowers who know stuff about certain business links and practices.

Someone doesn’t want any more damaging leaks to appear and is willing to spend a lot with their PR advisers to make it public.

It really is that transparent.

And sad.

View Comment

Grant King (@Sprotson)Posted on2:12 pm - Mar 20, 2013


will more police time be wasted in investigating “leaks”, or is it only investigated if it is to do with scotland’s establishment “team” ?

So breaking the law should not be investigated?

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on2:25 pm - Mar 20, 2013


Suspicious Leishman is not convinced by Swiss deal

Richard Wilson
Sports writer
Wednesday 20 March 2013

“Jim Leishman has ruled out any rescue package for Dunfermline Athletic that involves an injection of funds from a Swiss-based investor who has been in discussions with the club’s majority shareholder …

“The investor in Switzerland was not a Dunfermline supporter and, as far as the steering group was concerned, there was no way forward with that,” explained Leishman. “They were speaking to him on behalf of the board, not on behalf of this steering group. I have since found out who he is and what they are about and we would not recommend this person to the Dunfermline supporters.”

Wonder who the mystery investor is? Sounds a little bit like the type of ‘Quick Loan’ investor CG used.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/suspicious-leishman-is-not-convinced-by-swiss-deal.20558806

View Comment

angus1983Posted on2:47 pm - Mar 20, 2013


finloch says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 14:10

Make no mistake – this is a professionally coordinated (pre-written) story about how there is an active police investigation into “leaks”.

Yes, it’s a “press release”. If you copy and paste the opening sentence into Google, you’ll see it’s been quoted verbatim in a multitude of news outlets.

It reads like it came from either Strathclyde Police or Murray’s lawyers. Certainly not from Ibrox, where they’d have been much more careful with the “former club” thing! 🙂

Anything more sinister than that? I don’t think so.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on2:53 pm - Mar 20, 2013


Danish Pastry says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 14:25

Suspicious Leishman is not convinced by Swiss deal
————————————————————————————-

Neither am I and I wonder if there is any connection with Green’s Blue Pitch Holdings Consortium which was the largest shareholder in TRFCL and supposedly based in Zurich represented by Mr Celano who has connections to Mr Naqvi the Pakistani-born Dubai investment banker who was an on-off investor if RIFC Plc.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on3:12 pm - Mar 20, 2013


ecobhoy says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 14:53
1 0 Rate This
Danish Pastry says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 14:25

Suspicious Leishman is not convinced by Swiss deal
————————————————————————————-

Neither am I and I wonder if there is any connection with Green’s Blue Pitch Holdings Consortium which was the largest shareholder in TRFCL and supposedly based in Zurich represented by Mr Celano who has connections to Mr Naqvi the Pakistani-born Dubai investment banker who was an on-off investor if RIFC Plc.
——–

Aye, the tangled web ecobhoy. Ye never know though, Mr Fook Meng might be in on it too … or even …. nah, surely not, he’s sipping a nice wee chilled Chateau Meursualt at the Monte Carlo Country Club.

View Comment

Carl31 (@C4rl31)Posted on3:22 pm - Mar 20, 2013


Celtic Paranoia (@CelticParanoia) says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 13:41
8 0 i
Rate This
angus1983 says:
Tuesday, March 19, 2013 at 17:50
56 0 i
Rate This

I’m not quite getting what’s different in the RFC v DAFC situations.

Both clubs owed an amount of cash to HMRC. HMRC have been granted a WUO for DAFC.

How did RFC escape this? By going into administration voluntarily?

And, if so, why didn’t DAFC pull the same stunt?

——————————————————————-

Perhaps because RFC had the brass to dispute the bill hence the FTTT. Therefore HMRC did not want to pursue a WUO whilst the amount was still in dispute.

That and DAFC’s “who are these people?” brigade is much much smaller than RFC’s

= = = = =

RFC were served with a WUO based on CW’s non-payment of ‘straight in-straight out’ (SiSo)taxes – VAT, PAYE and ENIC. The disputed amounts in the Big Tax Case were’nt involved IIRC.
CWs non-payment amounted to about £15m, as I recall – this had nowt to do with BTC amounts relating to a period that ended before CW took ownership.
Where these SiSo taxes are involved, the stated policy of HMRC is that no CVA will be granted.
CW voluntarily putting ‘financial basketcase’ RFC into admin was simply to make sure their ‘own’ administrators got appointed – D&P.

I haven’t read anywhere whether the DAFC situation is a WUO over an amount that is SISo taxes.

View Comment

Carl31 (@C4rl31)Posted on3:28 pm - Mar 20, 2013


Could the mystery Swiss DAFC investor be a big cheese?

Is he being rejected because the business plan is full of holes?

Or are things going like clockwork?

Who is monitoring this? … who is on Swiss watch?

Is he part of a consortium, or is he on his (tobler)own?

View Comment

FinlochPosted on3:29 pm - Mar 20, 2013


finloch said:
this is a professionally coordinated (pre-written) warning to new whistleblowers
…………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Angus said
Yes, it’s a “press release”….and it reads like it came from either Strathclyde Police or Murray’s lawyers.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Angus, I’d bet it didn’t originate at Strathclyde Police or Murray’s legal team. They are both just bit parts in someone’s warning shot to persons unknown not to come forward with any whistle-blowing.

Ask yourself who would go out of their way to pay for this PR campaign.

Then you’ll be on the money.

View Comment

ianagainPosted on3:36 pm - Mar 20, 2013


And aimed at our man with the concealed tape recorder. Go on Craigy you know you want to.

View Comment

angus1983Posted on3:45 pm - Mar 20, 2013


Carl31 (@C4rl31) says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 15:22

RFC were served with a WUO …

I thought TGEF put them into voluntary administration, apparently thinking that a CVA was a realisitic possibility? At the time, I think the (then) current non-payment of tax wasn’t known about … rather an annual loss of £10m plus possible BTC liabilities were the reasons publicly given by CW:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-17015966

I don’t think a Winding Up Petition was submitted at any point. Rather, liquidation came as a consequence of the failure to exit administration.

View Comment

posmillPosted on4:21 pm - Mar 20, 2013


Carl31 (@C4rl31) says:
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 15:28

The road to Helvetia is paved with good intentions.

View Comment

Comments are closed.