Gilt-Edged Justice

About the author

Avatar

Big Pink administrator

Big Pink is John Cole; a former schoolteacher based in the West of Scotland, He is also a print and broadcast journalist who is engaged in the running of SFM . Former gigs include Newstalk 106, the Celtic View, and Channel67. A Celtic fan, he is also the voice of our podcast initiative.

331 Comments so far

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on7:59 pm - Mar 10, 2013


whisperer18 says:
Sunday, March 10, 2013 at 16:33

For what it’s worth … most of my pals/fellow CFC fans are slowly but surely starting to change and to state that “IF” TRFC get shoehorned anywhere other than whatever league is immediately above them come next season they are “Chucking It ”

Strange BUT True. So ah reckon ALL of Scottish Fitba better BEWARE !!
________________________________________________________________

I’ve just come home from my Sunday drink with all my CFC mates and strange but not one is thinking of not renewing their ST next year and everyone is looking forward to another European run. Sure you’re not drinking with bluenoses whisperer 🙂

Like all my CFC mates I don’t care where Rangers end-up and if they are shoehorned into the SPL then they will be slaughtered by a large number of teams and most likely relegated 🙂

View Comment

Tartawulver

TartawulverPosted on8:24 pm - Mar 10, 2013


ecobhoy says:
Sunday, March 10, 2013 at 19:59

Like all my CFC mates I don’t care where Rangers end-up and if they are shoehorned into the SPL then they will be slaughtered by a large number of teams and most likely relegated 🙂
——————————————
If heaven and earth are moved to escalate progress Rangers into the SPL in the name of finance / TV interest / whatever else, I wonder what the odds would be on them EVER being relegated. Even if they were to be the worst Rangers team ever. Even if they were the worst Scottish team ever.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on8:26 pm - Mar 10, 2013


Auldheid (@Auldheid) says:
Sunday, March 10, 2013 at 13:23

ecobhoy says:
Sunday, March 10, 2013 at 10:47

Re my wmd reference. I did not mean it was your point, I meant it was the kind of thinking that allowed LNS to reach his decision. No one can prove that something that does not exist does not exist. It was a clever little bit of mind play used to justify a war.

Had a few rums before I posted that point last night and not sure if I made it as clear as I intended but at no time did I think the point came from you. Never entered my head.
_________________________________________

I never thought that you thought it was my point if you see what I mean. I just fail to see how the hundreds of thousand of Iraqis who have lost their lives can end-up being used as some kind of debating point in the shitty and murky depths of Scottish Football administration.

I hope that wasn’t your intention and am inclined to believe it wasn’t but it’s almost on a par with pairing Nazi Germany and its many atrocities to an issue, that only those who haven’t a clue about the suffering involved, could ever make a connection with.

As I pointed out in my earlier post I think you are totally mistaken in the thinking you attribute to LNS – his tribunal did not attempt to prove something that didn’t exist and no matter how often you repeat that mistaken mantra it will not make it true.

His decision was made on the evidence presented and I am sure he would have reached a different verdict if ALL the available evidence had been presented. The failure to do so lies firmly at the door of the SPL and I am bemused by people who cannot accept that simple fact but would rather drift into the realms of conspiracy theory and WDM in Iraq.

If there is any conspiracy to be found it lies in the corridors that connect the SPL & SFA IMO.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on8:32 pm - Mar 10, 2013


TW (@tartanwulver) says:
Sunday, March 10, 2013 at 20:24

ecobhoy says:
Sunday, March 10, 2013 at 19:59

Like all my CFC mates I don’t care where Rangers end-up and if they are shoehorned into the SPL then they will be slaughtered by a large number of teams and most likely relegated 🙂
——————————————
If heaven and earth are moved to escalate progress Rangers into the SPL in the name of finance / TV interest / whatever else, I wonder what the odds would be on them EVER being relegated. Even if they were to be the worst Rangers team ever. Even if they were the worst Scottish team ever.
—————————————————————-

I wouldn’t worry too much because their support would disappear when they got slaughtered by team after team and they would be bust in less than a season I reckon. Maybe at that point some kind of sanity could be achieved by decent Bears and they could start again without the Lambeg Drum being beaten.

However at that stage who will own Ibrox?

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on9:01 pm - Mar 10, 2013


ecobhoy says:

Sunday, March 10, 2013 at 20:26

” If there is any conspiracy to be found it lies in the corridors that connect the SPL & SFA IMO”.

Agreed,
——————————————————–
I hope that wasn’t your intention

As I said it never crossed my mind and the analogy you use re nazi Germany is your construction not mine and never was, so I’d rather you not attribute that kind of crass thinking to me.

My point was that you cannot prove that something that does not exist does not exist. The Iraq reference was on this point and I was not attributing it to LNS per se but the enquiry process (althought that is probably giving the SFA too much credit) . I obviously never made myself clear but I’d had a couple of rums..

Out of interest what evidence could the SPL have provided to prove sporting advantage occured?
———————————————————
I obviously failed to get my points over clearly enough, as I said I understood your points and accept them so my thinking is not mistaken. I found your points persuasive in terms of how LNS reached his conclusions. I’m not saying you are wrong, I’m saying the findings arrived at by what looks like a flawed process have consequences for the keeper of the rules – FIFA.- and that is where to go next.

View Comment

Avatar

SeniorPosted on9:28 pm - Mar 10, 2013


“Scottish football is simply being fixed. In plain sight. With no shame”
______________________________

It’s important to remember that there is no shame left at Hampden – the gloves are off and the mask has slipped. The only thing on the agenda is to place that new club Servco in the SPL ASAP.

They couldn’t care less if fans walk away next season They figure small attendances is a small price to pay to have this new club in the SPL. They know that servco will have full hooses.
Ironic barely covers it – every club that abided by the rules will be in trouble as a result of the fiasco of the past eighteen months.but the chosen ones will be in rude health.
No the only thing that will stop this sham will be for fans to implement a total ban on all Scottish football – now – this season. Next season will be too late, the plot will be hatched, once that happens there will be no reversing this diabolical decision.
They gamble that things will settle down and return to a semblance of normality over the course of a couple of seasons. Watching the reaction so far from the constituents of Scottish football they may well be on a winner.

View Comment

Avatar

angus1983Posted on9:35 pm - Mar 10, 2013


Does anyone actually think FIFA will be interested?

Their normal course of action is to refer the matter to the “local” national association to resolve (viz. TRFC going to court to try and overturn the transfer embargo).

Personally, I think anyone trying to get the LNS decision overturned will confront a brick wall. It’s just not gonna happen. The SFA will see to that, one way or another. If FIFA ask them, they’ll say “aye, it’s all fair enough, move along now.”

Realistically, the very best we can hope for is that TRFC don’t get promoted above their rightful station at the end of this season – and that their current fiscal policies lead to a more just outcome this time.

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on9:45 pm - Mar 10, 2013


angus1983 says:

Sunday, March 10, 2013 at 21:35

Does anyone actually think FIFA will be interested?
===========
Normally no but they have set up a whistleblower web site

https://www.bkms-system.net/bkwebanon/report/clientInfo?cin=6fifa61&language=eng

that looks tailor made for investigating.

View Comment

Avatar

dentarthurdent42Posted on9:54 pm - Mar 10, 2013


On Rangers getting into the SPL at some stage.

They will need a substantially better squad than they have just now to even think about competing. By that I mean competing for the top six (or eight by that time, maybe), not competing to win it.

Where is the money going to come from to a, build that squad and b, pay the wages it will require.

As far as I can see the business model is no better than it ever was, and the expectations of the support are no different. they fully expect to go to the top of Scottish football and to look down on everyone else. That may be good and well, in theory, but with the squad they have they are to a large extent starting from scratch. They are also doing it with reduced income.

I genuinely just don’t see how it is going to be achieved. I genuinely believe that Charles Green was promised a place in the SPL. That would almost certainly have meant the bulk of the squad staying, income not being reduced to a huge extent, and the club being “debt free” therefore having no loan repayments or interest to pay.

That would have worked I think, but the fans of SPL clubs stopped it.

View Comment

Avatar

paulmac2Posted on10:05 pm - Mar 10, 2013


smartbhoy says:
Sunday, March 10, 2013 at 11:53
26 0 Rate This
willmacufree says:
Sunday, March 10, 2013 at 11:50
0 0 Rate This
34k+ is a terrific crowd for a 4th tier game by any standards.
——————————————

It sure is…especially for a match at 3pm on a Saturday and not televised. Also having 38K season ticket holders and various levels of free tickets being sent out randomly.
…………………………………

I maybe wrong….but if you have 38k season ticket holders…then for the purpose of reducing liability you should be stating 38k as the attendance as a minimum…otherwise you may still have an outstanding liability to 4k ST holders for 1 game… 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

FIFAPosted on10:19 pm - Mar 10, 2013


If Sevco where to be shoehorned into the SPL ,Charlie would go mental,for one as he said not in his tenure would they play there and two he would need some serious cash to buy players and pay wages in this league and with no chance of a euro run it would be time for the sfa etc to produce the rabbits out the hat to save this club again ,dont think so,do what you want guys but you will ,as sure as night follows day ,be digging a new grave for this new club and I dont think their fans would be too happy with your help,you better look into the crystal ball and see whats ahead ,its not good if you are a sevconian,all together now ,[It looks like trouble ahead]

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on10:26 pm - Mar 10, 2013


TW (@tartanwulver) says:
Sunday, March 10, 2013 at 20:24

If heaven and earth are moved to escalate progress Rangers into the SPL in the name of finance / TV interest / whatever else, I wonder what the odds would be on them EVER being relegated. Even if they were to be the worst Rangers team ever. Even if they were the worst Scottish team ever.
================================================

Heaven and earth will only move if the rest of the clubs wish it to. The same groundswell of opinion by the fans as last summer will surely mean it won’t happen.

The really sad thing for me is that those such as Alex Smith, David Provan, Craig Burley, and the endless line of media commentators who are demanding a fast track are basically saying the only way the game can survive is by Rangers being in the top league and winning it. If they can be fast tracked into it against the natural laws of sporting integrity then they can be fast tracked to the top of it. People should be careful what they wish for at times.

View Comment

Avatar

paulmac2Posted on10:33 pm - Mar 10, 2013


So Alex Smith reckons… this NEW club who is pretending to be the old club should be (unfairly) promoted above others….because Scottish football needs them financially up top…

Translated…this NEW club can do whatever it wants whenever it wants…regardless of rules…regulations and the rest of Scottish Football…and once they are in the top tier…just watch as they are given a free run with full support of their friends at the SFA…

And as for relagation….forget it….Scottish doesn’t allow it!

A league where a team is not allowed to be relagated is called fixed!

View Comment

Avatar

bad capt madmanPosted on10:33 pm - Mar 10, 2013


Ecobhoy,
I think I can follow your logic about the evidence presented and LNS being led by it, but I still would assume, and hope, that a panel not bound by Court standards would use the main evidence available i.e. the full regulations of the SPL and the SFA, and test other arguments against them. If that were the case, then LNS should have taken oral evidence from Mr Bryson with a BIG pinch of salt considering he would probably not have been able to show written examples of his interpretation, either in Scotland or anywhere else in Europe which are governed by UEFA regs that the SFA ones are supposedly based on.
Sorry, Im still of the view that the defence of the LNS decision is overly legalistic, and does not change the fact that LNS used standards of proof which were not appropriate to a civil case where balance of probabilities, common sense, custom and precedent should have been more consistent with his remit.
Further, if the SFA had dealt with the matter internally, there would not have been the overly legalistic double thinking going on, sorry, there would not have been a high court judge’s experience involved. There would have been an interpretation of RFCs actions assessed against the regulations that every club has had to follow for years, or risk the judgement of non legally trained FA officials, as happened to Spartans, etc etc.
No, what we have here is a succesfully sneaky campaign where a proper guilty verdict could be minimised through the involvement of judges with a remit designed to do just that.

View Comment

Avatar

angus1983Posted on10:54 pm - Mar 10, 2013


Auldheid (@Auldheid) says:
Sunday, March 10, 2013 at 21:45

Normally no but they have set up a whistleblower web site
——

Looks like it could be worth a punt. Certainly the complainant type (i.e. anyone) and complaint fit with their requirements.

View Comment

Avatar

prohibbyPosted on12:11 am - Mar 11, 2013


Captain Haddock says:
Sunday, March 10, 2013 at 22:33

I agree C.H. I’m not a lawyer, just an ordinary guy who hopes never to have to turn to lawyers or courts to get a fair deal but recognises that lawyers and courts are a necessary part of civiliation. Now if LNS had been sitting bewigged on the bench in court, I would have been inclined to tug my forelock and say “Yes m’Lud” and accept his decision as, like Judge Judy’s, real and final. However, he wasn’t bewigged and wasn’t sitting on the Bench. He was, as I see it, wearing the hat of an expensive lawyer addressing a taxing question for clients paying him to get them of the hook. Now, I’m not suggesting the noble lord was being unscrupulous or dishonest, he was – as I see it – just doing what lawyers do. He solved a problem with neat and plausible legal argument.

View Comment

Avatar

dreddybhoyPosted on12:46 am - Mar 11, 2013


Brenda says:
Sunday, March 10, 2013 at 19:23
37 1 Rate This
It’s anybody’s guess how many free tickets are issued for home games as said before my relative gets 100 yes 100 handed in to their place of work don’t really care if you believe me,I’ve seen them with my own eyes, have even been offered some!!!! I politely refused

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

Are they all in the club deck?

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on3:12 am - Mar 11, 2013


Here is a ticket from an early game that was doign the rouns and is not a photo shop. My nephew went to the first few games including Brechin but has stopped going a few months back after QoS game. He says that there were many around him in the family stand with these tickets – if you bought an adult one you got 2 free ones for the kids. He also received free ones for later games as he was an ST in the old days – however he is one of the bright ones and can see what is going on. So there is a lot of these tickets going about for sure…………bums on seats is one thing – money derived from those seats is another thing………..

http://s1287.beta.photobucket.com/user/exiledcelt13/media/408331_10152135423785858_594902469_n_zps23d63046.jpg.html?evt=email_share

View Comment

Avatar

troubledfanPosted on5:03 am - Mar 11, 2013


ecobhoy @1937.
have you spoken to many/any trfc/trifc/rfc or what ever they,re called at the moment fans ?
illogically/unbelievably they think they,ve been ” punished ” unfairly.
they think the sfa/spl are rife with corruption.
they think P L is behind it all.
jesus they even think they,re the same old club 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on6:43 am - Mar 11, 2013


More MSM rehash of the feel good stories requested by the Minister of Propoganda Josef Traynor to be printed…………

Funny how there are now “business editors” ready to look into sports stories all of a sudden……..last year there were none apparently……………

Churnulism at its very best…………….

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/rangers-aim-for-100m-turnover.20455502

Rangers aim for £100m turnover

Greig Cameron

Deputy Business Editor.

Monday 11 March 2013

RANGERS plan to increase the club’s turnover to £100 million a year once it returns to top-level competition.

The announcement comes little more than a year after the club was plunged into administration, allowing Charles Green’s Sevco consortium to buy the business and assets after it was liquidated.

Finance director Brian Stockbridge made the prediction for the third division side as he believes an enhanced retail operation combined with greater sponsorship income – including a naming deal for Ibrox Stadium – will supplement match-day and football revenue.

The club pulled in £9.5m of revenue in the seven months between May and December last year and reported a £7m loss.

But Mr Stockbridge pointed out that Rangers historically had a turnover of about £60m in years when competing in the Champions League – not including merchandising, which had been hived off to JJB Sports.

Rangers is now involved in a joint venture with Mike Ashley’s Sports Direct, and recently signed a kit deal with Puma.

Mr Stockbridge revealed the Ibrox megastore is soon to be made four times bigger, on a site on the ground floor of the Edmiston House office block at the stadium.

He said: “When [Rangers] did its own retail it made £20.5m turnover and £5.6m profit just from merchandising.

“But because the club needed money, it gave it to JJB and took an upfront payment, then took the £3m annual licensing fee.

“So, let’s say if we can only do as good as £20m [even] with Mike Ashley as our partner, with Puma and with internet sales, then suddenly we are looking at £80m to £90m turnover.

“Then you look at the additional sponsorship possibilities and think it would be nice to get it to £100m, but even then I wouldn’t think my job would be done at that point, as it could go on beyond that.”

He said Rangers were looking at opening a retail store at Glasgow Airport and one in Belfast. Internet sales and the use of Puma’s international retail presence are also expected to grow revenue.

He said: “The Puma deal is a very good one. Typically, a manufacturer pays upfront and will claw that back at the end through the shirt prices.

“With Puma, I negotiated that we get a very high royalty rate on everything, even what we sell in the shop here at Ibrox.”

A naming-rights deal for Ibrox is due to be in place for the start of the next season, with Sports Direct one potential partner.

The sales figures for online streaming of Rangers games this season are described as encouraging and the venture is “profitable”. The club is also in discussions over rolling out WiFi around Ibrox and upgrading the electronic displays.

While Blackthorn Cider has agreed a deal to be shirt sponsor, Mr Stockbridge is looking for an additional brand to place on the youth team strips as they cannot carry alcohol advertising.

Mr Stockbridge said: “It is about looking at new things the club has never done before to generate revenue, but without ripping people off. This is more than a football club. It is a global brand. Anything that can be done to improve the revenue for the club and commercialise things in a more effective way should be looked at.”

While the exact reconstruction of the Scottish football leagues remains undecided, Mr Stockbridge is adamant the club does not need to be playing in the top flight to be profitable.

He admits to being “horrified” at some commercial contracts into which the club had previously been tied, but is delighted with where it now stands.

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on6:49 am - Mar 11, 2013


“He said Rangers were looking at opening a retail store at Glasgow Airport” – thought CG had said he had signed the lease??? Fibber!

“He said: “The Puma deal is a very good one. Typically, a manufacturer pays upfront and will claw that back at the end through the shirt prices. With Puma, I negotiated that we get a very high royalty rate on everything, even what we sell in the shop here at Ibrox.”

So that means no money up front ……….meaning no pay day before next season for the warchest for Ally in January,,,,,,,,,

A naming-rights deal for Ibrox is due to be in place for the start of the next season, with Sports Direct one potential partner.

Again did CG not say this was done???????

Why is the “interviewer” not allowed to ask questions?

Why did RFC and now TRFC need communciations/PR reps – could have saved a lot of money – the MSM does it for free LOL!!!!

View Comment

Avatar

jonnyodPosted on6:50 am - Mar 11, 2013


Re sevco getting fast tracked to the SPL and struggling to make top 6 .
How much really would a club have to spend on the team if (as we have clearly witnessed) they do not have to play to the same rules as all the rest .
Anyone thinking they would struggle in the SPL is being a bit naive to say the least .
Why would the peepil go to all the trouble of getting them there and simply sit back and watch them implode because they can’t win games
IMO honest mistakes (remember them ) would again reach epidemic levels and the MSM will blow the dust off the old paranoia statement .

View Comment

Avatar

jonnyodPosted on6:57 am - Mar 11, 2013


You can always rely on the MSM/LL to come out with a feel good moonbeam to distract the hard of thinking bears from a bad result .
Meet the new boss ,same as the old boss

View Comment

Avatar

jonnyodPosted on7:00 am - Mar 11, 2013


If Mr Stockbridge is serious about reaching £100m turnover buy doing things the club has not done before ,may I suggest he gets all the fans to PAY for their tickets
Small steps and all that

View Comment

Avatar

Carfins Finest. (@edunne58)Posted on7:25 am - Mar 11, 2013


He said: “The Puma deal is a very good one. Typically, a manufacturer pays upfront and will claw that back at the end through the shirt prices.

“With Puma, I negotiated that we get a very high royalty rate on everything, even what we sell in the shop here at Ibrox.”

Puma Says ‘ We’ll suply you with our bog standard blue shirts free of charge. You can get ‘Iron On’ logos for your shirt sponsor.We will pay you 5p in the £ for sales of tops from your own shop’

NOTHING UP FRONT.

My thoughts only.

View Comment

Tartawulver

TartawulverPosted on7:27 am - Mar 11, 2013


exiledcelt posts re. TRFC finances

CG’s statements about the puma deal stand out, don’t they?

“Typically, a manufacturer pays upfront and will claw that back at the end through the shirt prices…With Puma, I negotiated that we get a very high royalty rate on everything, even what we sell in the shop here at Ibrox.”’

So presumably puma said they were not willing to risk paying any money up front, which, given the original Rangers’ non-payment of creditors and sudden re-launch with much bragging about being flush with money, was sensible. Looks like instead they forced Rangers to share the risk, so if they only sell a few thousand shirts, puma don’t lose anything. Rangers were obviously in a desperately poor negotiating position, and puma must have crunched a few realistic numbers and ignored pitches claiming ‘500 million’ etc.

CG negotiating the worst ever kit deal to go with the worst ever Rangers team?

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on8:08 am - Mar 11, 2013


TW (@tartanwulver) says:
Monday, March 11, 2013 at 07:27
1 0 Rate This
exiledcelt posts re. TRFC finances

CG’s statements about the puma deal stand out, don’t they?

=========================
I believe it is Stockbridge who is being quoted.

I don’t think AIM will be very happy with the £100m turnover boast (a repeat of what Green said in Sydney) coming from the finance director of a listed company. Some people might be suckered into buying shares on the back of such statements. Remember that this is a company with a current annual turnover of around £15m. Plus its cash will have run out in 12 months from now.

Isn’t it striking, though, how the business journalists have exactly the same policy on asking questions of “Rangers” as the sports journalists- don’t ask any, just print whatever they tell you.

View Comment

Tartawulver

TartawulverPosted on8:51 am - Mar 11, 2013


neepheid says:
Monday, March 11, 2013 at 08:08

I believe it is Stockbridge who is being quoted.

Isn’t it striking, though, how the business journalists have exactly the same policy on asking questions of “Rangers” as the sports journalists- don’t ask any, just print whatever they tell you.
——————————————-
You’re right, my apologies. I notice that Mr Stockbridge coins the term “This is more than a football club”. That’s a snappy phrase, I’m surprised someone, like Barcelona, say, didn’t think of it first. (Only with Barcelona, the ‘more’ parts of the club are positives).

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on8:56 am - Mar 11, 2013


Also remember that the 7 million loss was being offset by all the deals being announced – Puma kit suppliers, Blackthorn City, Sports Direct Park and a shop at Glasgow airport – all of this was figured out to say well they can get 1 million from this etc etc and make some money from this……….

Now it is being confirmed by Stockbridge to be wrong

There is no up front money from Puma – a % on the items sold means the trickle of money comes after its sold – long after. Puma obviously were not going to give up money as TW says – that in itself is a big indicator…..

Blackthorn won’t be worn by the Youth team – seriously? No one has any qualms about selling jerseys to children with alcoholic sponsors but woe betide any youth team wear them. So they don’t wear Tennants? Or was the money so low that you need to find a new one for youth team?

Sports Direct is also not signed – hence the announcement with no details of the moeny involved.

My favourite part is this

Mr Stockbridge said: “It is about looking at new things the club has never done before to generate revenue, but without ripping people off.

Why would a financial director ever say that last part……it should not even be in his thoughts……..

CG said once something about accepting anyone’s money unless its drug money.

I think Freudian slips are happening too often now…………as Goosey says, its Spivtime!

View Comment

Avatar

manandboyPosted on9:13 am - Mar 11, 2013


Beats me why anyone would wish to be associated with Sevco/New Rangers.

The Rangers brand has been so badly damaged it must be nigh on beyond repair.

It does remain true however that they are ‘more than just a club’ –

They’re also a Loyalist racist sectarian criminal gang.

View Comment

Avatar

angus1983Posted on9:37 am - Mar 11, 2013


manandboy says:
Monday, March 11, 2013 at 09:13

They’re also a Loyalist racist sectarian criminal gang.
——

Canny, mate. I’ve been banned for less! 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on9:55 am - Mar 11, 2013


Blackthorn won’t be worn by the Youth team – seriously? No one has any qualms about selling jerseys to children with alcoholic sponsors but woe betide any youth team wear them. So they don’t wear Tennants? Or was the money so low that you need to find a new one for youth team?

I stand corrected – went on the TRFC site (another 500 million hits today!) and checked – although it does show reserve and youth teams training in shirst with Tennants logo, actual photos of matches has them wearing Unicef and some Rangers Charities logo – so sorry on that one 🙂

Although would have to wonder how much money can be made out of a sponsor for u-15 footballers…………..hardly worth ironing on the logos really!

View Comment

ismellafix

ismellafixPosted on10:08 am - Mar 11, 2013


Why would Puma, (or any other sports goods company) provide Sevco with an up front deal, especially after their pre-decessors, (Cheats FC) gave JJB Sports a royal shafting?

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on10:14 am - Mar 11, 2013


Final thought……..

“With Puma, I negotiated that we get a very high royalty rate on everything, even what we sell in the shop here at Ibrox.”

………..even what we sell in the shop here at Ibrox…………….hmmm!

Most clubs encourage their supporters to buy at their club shops since the money goes to them directly………..Celtic have this on their website that all products bought in CFC shop will mean ALL the profits are invested in the club – not just royalty rates that are even on items sold there………

Sports Direct own the shops……….so what Brian is alluding to is that SD will get the profifts from the TRFC gift shops the same as if you bought it in another shop……….otherwise he would say “especially” instead of “even”………meaning SD own the TRFC shops they are trying to open up at Glasgow airport and Belfast………..and all profits other than a royalty rate go to Ashby…..

Another slip there methinks!

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on10:21 am - Mar 11, 2013


Interesting to see that Stockbridge said Rangers were looking at opening a retail store at Glasgow Airport and one in Belfast.

Was it not announced on Green’s trip to Dubai and Oz that the leases for the two shops had already been signed or am I becoming as confused as Charlie often seems to be?

View Comment

Avatar

pau1mart1nPosted on10:31 am - Mar 11, 2013


Blackthorn won’t be worn by the Youth team – seriously?

and cheap cider was just the right fit for that market too !
the pc brigade gone mad !
i blame the EU.

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on10:38 am - Mar 11, 2013


Cutting through all the cr*p what it comes down to is SPL inclusion a la Alex Smith gives TRFC the chance of publicity to drive an increase in turnover, although eight-fold is possibly pushing it a bit (you say possibly, I say definitely, potato, potaato…).

A struggling TRFC in the SPL would increase their crowds, possibly even increase the other teams although I’m not convinced on that latter arguement where good old integrity comes back into play. SFL2 inclusion, or new SFPL3 inclusion doesn’t. It constrains their market to the already converted.

Simples

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on10:39 am - Mar 11, 2013


So it appears crowd numbers may be on the decline therefore a drop in potential income from now till the end of the season.

Apparently no cash up front from Puma.

(However I wouldn’t get too smug, they will shift a heck of a number of strips and remember they will issue home and away at the same time, so the punters probably will buy both to support the club.)

That being said it is hard to see how the deals agreed with Sports Direct and Puma are not in their favour as opposed to T’Rangers. Ashley is a business man through and throuigh and he has no connection or love for T’Rangers. He will have sniffed out where there is cash to be made for him.

£100m turnover is just pie in the sky.

Nothing wrong with aiming for the stars but how many of us have sat and listened to that type of blue sky nonesense in your own work environment and thought; ‘This guy is just pulling our chain’ and how many times have you been proved right?

It really is time these guys just got their heads down and done some hard graft to run the club in a sustainable manner and time for T’Rangers fans to grap reality.

PS Notice there seems to have been two big offloads of shares , 400k each, reported now but held back from 6 March.

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on10:56 am - Mar 11, 2013


Another pile of tosh from MSM

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/real-life/campaign-honour-first-black-officer-1754388

Problem is – if you read the article the headline is misleading – because he never played for RFC……………MSM are so ridiculous!

+++++++++++++

Campaign to honour the first black officer in the British army who played for Rangers

10 Mar 2013 13:59

CAMPAIGNERS believe Walter Tull’s footballing and military careers should leave him in contention to be posthumously awarded the Military Cross.

ON the football field, he was a star and on the battlefield, he was a courageous fighter.

But Walter Tull, the grandson of black slaves who grew up to be a true British hero, has been largely forgotten.

It’s only now, 95 years after he was killed in battle, that a campaign has been launched to honour the first black officer in the British Army.

He was also a trailblazer on the pitch as one of the first black footballers in the British
professional game – signed by Tottenham Hotspur in 1909.

Walter’s brother Edward – who lived in Glasgow – persuaded him to join Rangers in 1914, but he left football when war broke out.

He signed for the Glasgow side in 1917 but was shot dead at the Somme in March 1918 – aged 29 – before he could make his debut.

Author Michael Morpurgo, who wrote bestselling novel War Horse, researched the story for a book.

He said: “We should all know about Walter. He was a hero of his time and, in so many ways, a hero for our time too.”

Campaigners believe Walter’s footballing and military careers should be remembered and are calling for him to be posthumously awarded the Military Cross.

According to a fellow officer, he was recommended for the award but there is no official record – and supporters suspect he missed out because he was black.

His promotion to officer broke rules forbidding “any negro or person of colour” being commissioned and so top brass may have been reluctant for him to receive one of wartime’s highest honours.

While Walter showed bravery in battle, it also took courage to deal with racial abuse from the terraces.

His tough childhood taught him how to be strong.

His father Daniel, whose own parents were both slaves, came to Britain from Trinidad, settled in Folkestone and married a local girl.

In 1897, when Walter was just nine, his parents died. His brother Edward was adopted and Walter was left in a London orphanage.

He had a natural football talent and was signed by Clapton FC in his teens. Walter was spotted by Spurs and was lured for a top weekly wage of £4 and a transfer fee of £10.

But he was constantly subjected to racial abuse from the stands.

One reporter covering a game in Bristol in October 1909 wrote of the crowd: “They made a cowardly attack upon him in language lower than Billingsgate. Tull is so clean in mind and method as to be a model for all white men.”

He played just 30 games for Spurs first team. He scored six times and was popular with Spurs fans.

When he was dropped, there was a suspicion it was because of the racial hostility from other fans.

One of the campaign backers – Northampton South MP Brian Binley – said: “I believe Walter’s departure from Spurs was more about the racism he encountered.”

The forward was sold to Northampton in 1911 and became a star – scoring four times in one match.

By 1914 he had played 111 games. He was on the verge of signing with Rangers when the war came. He volunteered for the 17th Middlesex and by the end of his training he had been promoted three times.

He fought along the front line, survived at Passchendaele, and in 1916, he was in the thick of the Battle of the Somme.

He was sent to the Italian front in the winter of 1917-18 and was mentioned in dispatches after leading 26 men across a river and bringing them back unharmed.

It was after that episode, a fellow officer revealed later, his name was put forward for the Military Cross.

Walter died in a burst of gunfire at the Somme, on March 25, 1918.

It’s a measure of his men’s devotion that they repeatedly tried to find his body. But it was never recovered.

An online petition, aiming for 100,000 signatures, has been set up to urge Downing Street to take up Walter’s case.

His memory has been honoured in other ways.

In 2004, Rangers won the Walter Tull Trophy with a 2-0 friendly victory over Spurs.

And this week, Philip Vasili’s play Tull will be premiered.

He said: “I’m convinced that to have given Walter his Military Cross would have admitted to the powers-that-be at the War Office that the rules had been broken in commissioning a black man.”

Walter’s story inspired Michael Morpurgo’s novel A Medal For Leroy and he hopes the brave soldier will one day be honoured with a statue outside the Imperial War Museum.

He added: “I simply feel more people should know about this remarkable man.”

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on10:59 am - Mar 11, 2013


In case anyone thinks I am disrespectful in the above post – the tosh is referring to the teneous link with RFC that is not there…………..he never played for them so why not say he is a Spurs player?

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on11:02 am - Mar 11, 2013


troubledfan says:
Monday, March 11, 2013 at 05:0

ecobhoy @1937.
have you spoken to many/any trfc/trifc/rfc or what ever they,re called at the moment fans ?
illogically/unbelievably they think they,ve been ” punished ” unfairly. they think the sfa/spl are rife with corruption. they think P L is behind it all. jesus they even think they,re the same old club 🙂
============================================================

I have mates and relatives who are Rangers supporters – as I’m no spring chicken most of them are mature in age and thinking and very few are happy with what they can glimpse behind the scenes at Ibrox. Some haven’t renewed their ST this season although some of those do go to the odd game.

Others did renew not to support Green but to support their club and to them it is still the same club. I have to be honest and say if it was Celtic in Rangers position then I would believe it is the same club and always would be irrespective of who legally owned it because I do believe the spirit of a club lives as long as fans continue to support it.

One thing is becoming clearer with the Rangers fans I talk to and that is the hope that they could rise up back to their rightful place by working their way-up from SFL3 has changed over the last few months.

That seems to coincide with the belief that McCoist just can’t cut it as a manager capable of getting them into the SPL and a growing fear about finances which might be unable to fund the players they actually need. A lot of the guys I am talking about are professional people or their own businesses and not short of a few bob but very very few bought shares.

But one thing for sure is it’s much harder to talk as openly to them as in the past because they are hurting badly and worried about what lies in front of them. None of them has ever bought into Green’s Moonbeams and they are embarrassed at his grandiose claims and they also worry about about the isolationism that yawns for the club if it doesn’t keep a grip of sectarianism.

These are decent people many of whom actually got to church on Sundays – there are a few Masons amongst them but no Orange Lodge members and some are close friends of mine. It is wrong to lump all Rangers fans together and if we do so then we destroy any chance that the decent ones can have any influence on the others.

It is worth remembering that 9,000 previous Rangers ST holders didn’t renew for this season which is around 25% of ST holders. On my admittedly tiny sample of Rangers fans I know well I would say the vast majority of the 25% were decent thinking Bears.

The biggest danger to Green from Rangers fans is that now – at least for the time being – the FTTT and LNS has passed and the transfer ban is ticking to an end that Green finds it harder to make them feel like ‘victims’ and they actually start to look at the football on offer and now can laugh at the Champions League claims. They are wakening up to the financial reality and I truly believe the amount who don’t trust Green an inch will keep on growing.

And this latest £100m MSM succulent horse meat shampoo – because it most certainly doesn’t need a DNA check to spot it ain’t lamb – will mean nothing to supporters and I believe it isn’t aimed at them but possibly to reassure the Scottish Establishment in a wider sense for a whole variety of reasons. I doubt if it will do anything to soothe the fears of the AIM operators who I think know where this little game is heading.

View Comment

Avatar

Carl31 (@C4rl31)Posted on11:09 am - Mar 11, 2013


Can anyone answer this question?

How good will Mr Green have to be to achieve £100m turnover when it could not be achieved by ” the greatest chairman in Ibrox history “?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1209341/Graeme-Souness-salutes-Sir-David-Murray-Rangers-great-quits-Ibrox-hot-seat.html

View Comment

Avatar

goosyPosted on11:12 am - Mar 11, 2013


jonnyod says:
Monday, March 11, 2013 at 06:50
Re sevco getting fast tracked to the SPL and struggling to make top 6 .
How much really would a club have to spend on the team if (as we have clearly witnessed) they do not have to play to the same rules as all the rest

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
“same rules as all the rest”

That`ll be right

On Sat Annan subbed a player immediately after the game entered the 3 min of extra time. The player walked slowly off the park but not any more slowly than happens with any other extra time sub Maybe 20 -30 secs at most
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Low and behold
The Rangers TV Commentator confidently stated that the Referee “will” add extra time for this time wasting tactic
And he did
He allowed 5 mins of extra time and an unjustified corner to boot

View Comment

Avatar

aramintamoobeamqcPosted on11:14 am - Mar 11, 2013


Carl31 (@C4rl31) says:

Can anyone answer this question?

How good will Mr Green have to be to achieve £100m turnover when it could not be achieved by ” the greatest chairman in Ibrox history “?

____

Finally build the casino/hover pitch.

View Comment

Avatar

Reilly1926Posted on11:23 am - Mar 11, 2013


ecobhoy says:
Monday, March 11, 2013 at 11:02

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

I had a look at RM there to see what the Berrs think about the £100m turnover claim. Most of them don’t believe a word of it and are kind of mocking the story.

I’ve got a feeling that we will get more of these bizarre claims, which are probably being made to hold up the share price, until Mr Charles and his friends can legally cash in their 1p shares.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on12:17 pm - Mar 11, 2013


Auldheid (@Auldheid) says:
Sunday, March 10, 2013 at 21:01

ecobhoy says:

Sunday, March 10, 2013 at 20:26
——————————————————–
Out of interest what evidence could the SPL have provided to prove sporting advantage occured?
———————————————————
I’m saying the findings arrived at by what looks like a flawed process have consequences for the keeper of the rules – FIFA.- and that is where to go next.
===================================================================

I would never attribute crass thinking to yourself as I enjoy reading all of your posts, not just on this subject, and giving thought to them.

On LNS I have certain opinions which I hope are based on fact, as far as is possible, but there are many missing bits of the jigsaw although I have severe doubts we will ever get them because they would probably reveal the corruption that has taken place.

The more I think about the issue the more I veer away from the incompetence factor or its importance as I just don’t think the apparently poor level of preparation and presentation of the SPL case is explainable simply in terms of poor quality legal work which appears to have not been corrected or possibly even supervised by the SPL.

I believe it isn’t enough to attack LNS on the basis that his verdict isn’t what was wanted by some people – unless serious legal flaws in the tribunal reasoning are identified then it can’t be successfully appealed even if someone was minded to actually take that step IMO. As a non-lawyer I cannot see any flaws in the LNS reasoning but would be happy to consider counter-points made, especially from a legal perspective. I am old enough to know that I ain’t the perfect person I was in my 20s

On the question of the flawed process having consequences for the keeper of the rules I would agree with that and that certainly needs a redrafting of the rules but I have serious doubts as to whether FIFA would step-in but it is a possibility and worth raising the issue with them.

Personally I believe it more important for the SFA to answer the simple question: Do you agree with Bryson’s position? If they do agree with it they should be asked how it was arrived at. Did it only emerge in a flash of wisdom in front of LNS or had it been discussed previously within the SFA and were the SPL and SFL ever advised or consulted especially with regard to the glaringly obvious problem it created in rule books. It might also be helpful to know if the SPL legal team knew of Bryson’s ‘understanding’ of the position prior to the LNS Hearing.

On ‘Sporting Advantage’ I think the concentration should have been on the amount available to pay players through the EBT mechanism. Then there could be many witnesses brought to explain the simple fact that more cash and higher wages, in the main, lets you buy and field better players and also support a larger squad than your competitors.

There could be a counter-argument that results on the field didn’t necessarily reflect an advantage. But at least the argument I believe could be won if done correctly and at the end of the day even if there isn’t a proveable Sporting Advantage it should be enough if the intention was there.

Similar to a gambling fix where a player or players have been paid to get the result required for the bookies to pay-out to the gambling syndicate and then everything goes to pot in the last second of the game when the non-bent team scores. The betting coup doesn’t happen but there was still an offence.

View Comment

Avatar

Ed BPosted on12:20 pm - Mar 11, 2013


In fairness to Greig Cameron – author of the Herald’s Stockbridge article – he’s been answering questions about the £100m claim on Twitter.

Doesn’t make the story any less ludicrous though.

View Comment

Avatar

SeniorPosted on12:22 pm - Mar 11, 2013


It’s a wonder no one has written to puma to ask how they would allow their name be associated with a club whose raison- d’etre is the complete opposite to parts of Puma’s mission statement!

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on12:58 pm - Mar 11, 2013


Anyone help. I am certain I read that ND had denied the ‘stranraer’ precedent, or at least said it was inapproriate (I’m sure the word rediculous was used somewhere) in this context but have been unable to track it down. Maybe about two months ago?

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on1:00 pm - Mar 11, 2013


ecobhoy says:

Monday, March 11, 2013 at 12:17

I knew what I meant when I wrote what I wrote but reckon that what I wrote is not exactly what I meant and I’m glad we got that out of the way. 🙂

The reason I mention FIFA is that they have opened up a Whistleblower site that I reckon allows the SFA to be by passed because they will not answer anyway.

I’ve given tsfm a draft to consider to be submitted from tsfm to the FIFA site as it is in keeping with the name of the blog and we have many readers. He’s been busy but something will surface in due course.

I was very interested in what you wrote on LNS in case I found anything that changed the draft I did on Friday, but as it was based on what do FIFA make of what LNS means for their rules, (and potential conflict of interest) as opposed to how LNS arrived at his findings I was happy to leave the draft as is. It is only by taking everyone’s views on board that key issues can be focussed on and, like yourself, the older I get the less I know that I know, so seek out other folk’s thoughts.

I’ll let tsfm do his stuff on the draft and suggested approach but I know of at least three submissions to FIFA via that web site and the more that go in the harder it becomes to ignore.

I reckon the SFA have blundered in their strategy, twisting football rules to such an extent to reach their desired outcome that FIFA will either have to back them up or inform them they are wrong. Doing and saying nothing is not an option if FIFA are honest about the intent of their Whistleblower web site.

On sporting advantage I take your point but I am sure the Neil Warnock sporting advantage argument re Leicester City that preceded the ten points deduction rule could be used to say that as well as clubs entering administration clubs breaking rules in a consistent way are deemed to have done so to gain sporting advantage and make it automatic that trophies/titles will be removed. That should deter cheaters.

The more you look at this the more the SFA are twisting football integrity in knots. FIFA’s attention has to be drawn to their behaviour.

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on1:23 pm - Mar 11, 2013


Total tangent but I see Hibs are complaining about lack of goal line technology. Why, when everyone viewing the tv could see that it was over the line is some tv bod not allowed to notify the ref. Zero cost, instant solution, problem solved. For those saying its not fair on the small untelevised teams, you would still be no worse off, no?

I’m not calling for replays or the thing where the rugby judge draws an imaginary tele in front of him. Three decisions. Yes (award), no or inconclusive (play on).

Same thing with Ferdinand in England (Off the ball nonsense with Torres yesterday). Cameras clearly catch him cheating. Retrospectively punish him. Have discussion with clubs refs, assocs etc what decisions you want approved in real time (ie. goals) restrospectively (diving would be my personal favourite) and not at all. To continue the existing – ignoring the blatant in front of you – is a little outdated, no? Again I’m not calling for £ms in technology to a bankrupt league. The technology is already there, literally!

View Comment

Avatar

Carl31 (@C4rl31)Posted on1:29 pm - Mar 11, 2013


Ecobhoy,
“On ‘Sporting Advantage’ I think the concentration should have been on the amount available to pay players through the EBT mechanism. Then there could be many witnesses brought to explain the simple fact that more cash and higher wages, in the main, lets you buy and field better players and also support a larger squad than your competitors.

There could be a counter-argument that results on the field didn’t necessarily reflect an advantage. But at least the argument I believe could be won if done correctly and at the end of the day even if there isn’t a proveable Sporting Advantage it should be enough if the intention was there.”

No. If thats the only criteria, it fails as a criticism. A club cannot be charged with being able to get more funds together, by allowable means, than other clubs. Thats whats been happening across the board. LNS states that EBTs are allowed due to the current status of the FTT. Thats not, nor can it sensible be argued, as any kind of charge against a club.

The issue is if an allowable cash generating scheme breached rules. Theoretically, raising an extra tenner by avoiding tax in an allowable way could still breach the rules. Its not the amount of money that is the problem – it is gaining an unfair advantage by breaking the rules or concealment of the fact a club is breaking the rules.

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on1:40 pm - Mar 11, 2013


Real issue with LNS is it gained RFC an advantage

Say Hearts, Celtic and Aberdeen were approached by a pipe smoking porn king who said here is a great idea EBTs……….

All SPL clubs look at it and have their tax advisors look at and see looks good but one major problem. You cannot have contractual payments in it and no player out there will sign up without a contract. Anyway you have to register all payments in a contract which means Hector won’t allow you to participate in this legal tax evasion scheme (ahem!).

So all SPL clubs say well thanks Paul, but with all this red tape from Hampden there is not way we could use this under current SFA regulations

SDM went ahead with it – why? – because he was the only one who KNEW he could get away with not registering players.

So CO and his pals covered it all up for years……….

SDM was allowed a legal tax evasion scheme (pending appeal) that was not open to any other club – because they thought the SFA player registration rules were rules being applied to all.

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on1:40 pm - Mar 11, 2013


There was some discussion the other day on the future direction of TSFM.

One of my thoughts was that in keeping with the blog title we should try and establish ourselves as the guards who watch the guards.

Had the SFA followed and properly policed their own rules we would not be looking at the footballing field of devastation that we now are because no one was watching the guards (the SFA).

Stewart Regan a few weeks back in response to the Question of Trust Blog came out with the eye brow raising statement that the SFA had no power over the Leagues. Nobody main stream really picked up on this surprising statement but that itself is no surprise. Lack of regulation enables misregulation or cheating if you like.

However whilst Mr Regan may be right in terms of the SFA do not have any power over the leagues (which is surely something that needs to be addressed constitutionally) the SFA definitely have power over clubs.

The instrument of this power is club licensing. For SPL clubs the UEFA FFP Licensing regime applies not just to get a licence to play in Europe, but also to get a licence to play in Scotland. For clubs in the SFL, National Club Licensing rules apply (although it will be interesting to see if two sets are used once the SPL and SFL merge).

Regardless of what licensing regime is applied the ability to award or withold a licence or award one conditionally gives the SFA the kind of power over clubs to make sure they act responsibly and sustainably, indeed that should be the main bloody purpose of club licensing if it not already is.

I would argue that the supporters of every club should be able to see what the licensing criteria are and if there club is meeting them. Now the SFA in the latest licensing rules have made a welcome change in terms of providing certain information to the public that in the past was treated as confidential, but unless folk are aware of a) the rules and b) if their club meet the criteria then the change, welcome as it is, will not have much of an impact.

So I’m suggesting that TSFM has a page that links to both UEFA Licensing Rules and National Club licensing rules as well as SFA and SPL Articles, that those with the experience of interpretation can read and question against what their clubs are telling the SFA and what the SFA are doing with what they are told and highlighting any questionable granting of a licence.

The opportunity to test out this approach is now upon us. Clubs have to submit licensing information to the SFA by 30th April for SFL clubs and (from memory 31st March for SPL clubs).

It is perhaps unfortuneate that this monitoring might focus on one club initially (The Rangers) because exceptional dispensation might be required to grant them a licence in the absence of historical accounts, but at least the grounds on which one is granted, can be questioned once The Rangers current accounts are published.

However Rangers supporters themselves should want to know that the SFA are doing their job in protecting them from another insolvency or administration event in the next two seasons, so this is not a suggestion to get at the Rangers but one to help them not fall foul of what has happened before.

There are lots of criteria to be met but the most important surrounds finance on which sustainability depends so there might not be as much rule sifting to do as one might imagine.

If TSFM develops expertise in understanding and articulating the licensing process then it will be the go to place for honest msm journalists who can then raise any issue we raise in a more public arena. In that scenario, knowing that they are being observed the guards might guard a lot better than they did in the past and in an odd way finally become accountable.

Comments?

View Comment

Avatar

dentarthurdent42Posted on1:48 pm - Mar 11, 2013


With regard the £100m story.

There isn’t one. It is a series of fantasies, which if true may well lead to Rangers turning over £100m. However if they did they would be way out-performing the previous club.

If Rangers were in the SPL and winning it.

If Rangers were in the CL group stages and performing well picking up prize money.

If Rangers had control over their own merchandising and were making a certain net profit.

If Season Ticket sales were at a certain level.

If naming rights generated a certain amount.

It’s all nebulous nonsense.The same ifs are true for Celtic, but they aren’t going to happen, not to the extent that the club’s turnover jumps to £100m.

For a publicly listed company, less than 1 year old, to be coming away with this nonsense is simply astounding.

Actually it isn’t, it is totally true to form.

In other, entirely separate considerations, how much do people think the season ticket prices at Ibrox will go up this year.

View Comment

Avatar

vertwolfPosted on2:05 pm - Mar 11, 2013


Does anyone know who is providing the safety certification for the stadia to be used at the Commonwealth Games? A FOI request could be interesting!

View Comment

Avatar

aramintamoobeamqcPosted on2:24 pm - Mar 11, 2013


SPL Fans United have had to move their site already, due to threats to the web hosting company. I trust Strathclyde’s finest will be looking into this with their customary haste.

http://splfansunited.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/we-had-to-move-the-site/

View Comment

Avatar

iceman63Posted on2:25 pm - Mar 11, 2013


Please give up with the defending of LNS. He chose not to challenge Bryson’s evidence despite there being no rule written and no existing precedent to allow this interpretation he allowed it through on the nod. He also gave adecision that no sporting advantage accrued with no presented evidence and with no reference to such a criterion in the terms of reference. He was no stitched up honest broker. LNS quite happily went ahead and put his name to a wholly bogus and discredited procedure. He has done this at least twice before to my knowledge

View Comment

Avatar

angus1983Posted on2:25 pm - Mar 11, 2013


dentarthurdent42 says:
Monday, March 11, 2013 at 13:48

In other, entirely separate considerations, how much do people think the season ticket prices at Ibrox will go up this year.

——

Well … if TRFC don’t get promoted, they’re really not going to be able to put the ST prices up much, are they? Even if they go up one league it’d be a bit cheeky to have a large increase.

Most people are fairly sure that TRFC could use some extra cash.

All the nonsense about Scottish fitba needing TRFC in a higher league is just that – nonsense. As we know. However, if they were to get punted up the tables then they’d be able to dramatically increase ST prices – the receipts for which will go towards this year’s accounts, remember.

View Comment

Avatar

bogsdolloxPosted on2:26 pm - Mar 11, 2013


:
Monday, March 11, 2013 at 13:48

In other, entirely separate considerations, how much do people think the season ticket prices at Ibrox will go up this year.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

This is a trick question, Isn’t it? It will depend on which league they play in. So as they will be in the SPL there will be a 100% increase.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on2:29 pm - Mar 11, 2013


exiledcelt says:
Monday, March 11, 2013 at 13:40

Real issue with LNS is it gained RFC an advantage

Say Hearts, Celtic and Aberdeen were approached by a pipe smoking porn king who said here is a great idea EBTs……….

All SPL clubs look at it and have their tax advisors look at and see looks good but one major problem. You cannot have contractual payments in it and no player out there will sign up without a contract. Anyway you have to register all payments in a contract which means Hector won’t allow you to participate in this legal tax evasion scheme (ahem!). So all SPL clubs say well thanks Paul, but with all this red tape from Hampden there is not way we could use this under current SFA regulations . . . .
=========================================================================

I think it is always important not to narrow focus too tightly so that it fits an already pre-conceived position as that severely limits the capability of thoroughly ‘testing’ the position held.

A lot of Scottish clubs would have looked at EBTs and similar schemes as would plenty of Scottish companies. The main reason that most company bosses wouldn’t become involved is because they, or their accountants and I ain’t talking about EBT salespeople here, would know that HMRC would be actively trying to plug the loopholes.

This has been a game for years with increasingly complex schemes being dreamt-up which HMRC then try and demolish even if it means introducing new legislation or taking legal action to try and close the loopholes.

Quite simply many company bosses just don’t want that kind of hassle and uncertainty in their tax affairs so they don’t touch these schemes. I would tend to think that it would need a situation where someone needed to find cash to fund something and couldn’t raise it any other way that they would go down this kind of route. It might also be used by someone wanting to make a company a bit better looking than it was so they could get out before the ballon went up.

You also haven’t taken into account that quite a few English clubs went down the EBT route so did they also know that the same loophole existed in English football rules – And does it actually exist down there?

If it doesn’t perhaps that is evidence that could have been put to LNS to prove that the Bryson scenario existed only in Scotland and indeed possibly only in Bryson’s head. There is more fruitful avenues where detective work and digging is required into very recent events than going back more than 10 years on a supposition that Murray knew of this huge loophole in Scottish Regulations.

I don’t believe Murray did know of any ‘loophole’ for the simple reason that I actually don’t believe one has ever existed and it’s a great pity that when the concept was introduced as evidence before LNS that it wasn’t torn to pieces by McKenzie but instead he accepted it and in so doing he committed the SLP to accepting it as well. That is what must be looked at and answers must be provided by the SFA & SPL because that is the smoking gun IMO.

View Comment

Avatar

youcantbuyhistoryPosted on2:29 pm - Mar 11, 2013


With Charles stating “this the worst rangers side ever”……,……..ratners fc anyone.

View Comment

Avatar

bogsdolloxPosted on2:40 pm - Mar 11, 2013


ddntwanttosaythisbut says:
Monday, March 11, 2013 at 14:29

With Charles stating “this the worst rangers side ever”……,……..ratners fc anyone.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I once had a chat with Gerry Ratner who maintained that the infamous comments he made were the fault of someone else.

Apparently Gerry showed the speech he was going to make to the then company secretary who suggested putting some humour into it. So he did and we all know what happened next but it clearly wasn’t his fault – it appears Gerry has the mind set to be a model TRFC fan.

View Comment

Avatar

tomtomPosted on2:53 pm - Mar 11, 2013


I take it that the Rod McKenzie who represented the SPL is the same person as that employed by Harper Macleod. If so, was he also involved in the investigation that led to the “prima facie” statement.

If the answers to the above are Yes then can we expect the SFA & SPL to now drop Harper Macleod from their list. I know that if I had instructed a legal firm to act for me and they had screwed it up as much as Harper Macleod appear to have done I’d be unlikely to use them again.

So, in my opinion, if they do continue to use their services then a fix was definitely on.

If I was McKenzie I’d have been embarrassed to turn up for work the next day.

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on2:55 pm - Mar 11, 2013


Ecobhoy – understand your point – and the one about English FA is very valid and could have been used for/against as I understand Arsenal were the ones who ended up paying taxes – how these players were registered with FA we won’t know – but no one was charged with invalid registrations down south so assume part of the reason they were caught and paid the taxes was that they registered players properly with FA but improperly for EBTs.

However some other of your points to be addressed

Someone needed to find cash and coun’t raise it another way – this was done in a period covering over 10 years where for 6 of them BoS were given him money like sweets, plus others like ENC and Dave King gave him money no issues – so there was no need to have EBT as a way of getting cash

Getting out before the balloon burst – he did this over 10 years – no way he had it planned in 2001 to leave in 2011 – his legacy and ego would not allow him to think of failure.

Reason I think SDM was not worried about the SFA registrations was

(1) He never worried about Hector or police or Jersey regulators for any paperwork he did not want to give over – as per evidence given. He thought he had shredded and hidden everything

(2) I don’t believe in coincidences – both CO and Gordon Smith knew about EBTs – one was the workds greatest administrator, the other was an agent whose clients signed for RFC. Judging by George Peat’s behaviour, not too sure he was not privy to same info.

(3) Sold it to CW – for a pound.- if you were worried your “secrets” would be unearthed by a stranger, then you would hold onto it surely

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on3:10 pm - Mar 11, 2013


iceman63 says:
Monday, March 11, 2013 at 14:25

Please give up with the defending of LNS. He chose not to challenge Bryson’s evidence despite there being no rule written and no existing precedent to allow this interpretation he allowed it through on the nod. He also gave adecision that no sporting advantage accrued with no presented evidence and with no reference to such a criterion in the terms of reference. He was no stitched up honest broker. LNS quite happily went ahead and put his name to a wholly bogus and discredited procedure. He has done this at least twice before to my knowledge
—————————————————————————————————————–

I wonder what role that people think LNS and the other two members were actually there to carry out? They weren’t there to bring evidence before the Hearing – they were their to listen to the evidence placed before the Hearing by the parties represented at the Hearing and to make a decision based on that evidence.

I would be very wary of any legal proceedings where those sitting in judgement also supplied the evidence and terms like kangaroo court and Star Chamber spring to mind.

The onus on providing the evidence to support the SPL charges was solely down to the SPL legal team and this is quite clearly stated in the LNS Decision and that is how it should be.

Certainly LNS and his two colleagues are able to question evidence produced to clear-up ambiguities that may have arisen or to ensure that what has been said is actually meant by the witness and answers the question to the best of their ability.

Indeed – and I accept without the actual transcript I don’t know that this is gospel – it appears that when Bryson (representing the SFA position with regard to the rule book) dropped his ‘bombshell’ that LNS then questioned McKenzie as to whether this could be the case and was told that was the position. As the SPL’s lawyer he represented the SPL position and if he didn’t he should have made clear to LNS that he wasn’t in a position to give a definitive answer and then called an appropriate SPL witness to do so.

I would also have thought in that case that McKenzie would – if he hadn’t previously been aware of the SFA position – have called also for an adjournment to discuss the matter with his client. Given the vital importance of this section of the evidence I am sure LNS would have been amenable. However, this didn’t appear to happen because McKenzie accepted the SFA position.

LNS has been told the SFA position which has been confirmed by the SPL, who has brought the case, and it has basically destroyed a major piece of the case. And yet some posters on here seem to think this disaster for the SPL case could be ‘cured’ by LNS providing evidence to the contrary. I don’t know how many times it has to be stated but that is not what LNS is there to do.

I am not here to defend LNS but it doesn’t help actually understand what has happened by merely throwing emotive jibes at LNS – that will do nothing for Scottish Football and neither will spurious Golden Principle false trails.

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on3:15 pm - Mar 11, 2013


tomtomaswell says:

If I was McKenzie I’d have been embarrassed to turn up for work the next day.

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

That only applies if, as you say, he duffed his shot.

If he played the fixed game his client wanted him to then nothing to be embarrassed about. If he managed to get the right result then the firm will be slapping him on the back.

View Comment

Avatar

justpedylanPosted on3:18 pm - Mar 11, 2013


£100m eh? To give this figure some context – something our specialised journalist friends singularly fail to do despite the acres of newsprint in our ever gullible scottish MSM – this is where it would put any club achieving it in season 11/12. (all figures easily available from Deloitte Football report 2013)

In Euro terms, at the current exchange rate then this would place TRFC in the lower reaches of the European top 20. Alongside clubs like Newcastle, Roma and Hamburg. Celtic meanwhile are pretty static at £51m turnover.

So, twice the size of the highest grossing Scottish club who have qualified for CL and on a par with clubs playng in the EPL and Bundesliga. None of whom recently lost to Annan Athletic (cheap shot I know).

And those fine journalists couldn’t think of a single meaningful question, not one. It’s only a matter of time before Charlie chances his arm at something really spectacular. Wonder if he’s ever come across hover pitches…………

After LNS i despaired and wondered why I bother with blogs like this one. Then the MSM perpetrate another PR garbage straight to print atrocity and I remember that it all has to be worth it.

View Comment

Avatar

zoylerPosted on3:25 pm - Mar 11, 2013


wottpi beat me to it. Who said McKenzie did not produce the result his clients wanted after a long drawn out process during which time the ‘restless natives’ had time to calm down.
Also echobhoy I understood it was an enquiry and not a trial. Was LNS not allowed to ask questions or if he was was he just very selective in the questions he asked?
Just too many things have gone the right way for one club for it not to smell to high heaven!

View Comment

scapaflow14

scapaflow14Posted on3:29 pm - Mar 11, 2013


ecobhoy says:

Monday, March 11, 2013 at 15:10

Very well put. We have an adversarial not inquisitorial justice system. If both sides agree that a witness’ evidence undermines a huge chunk of the complainant’s case, there really isn’t a great deal the judge can do!

View Comment

Avatar

tomtomPosted on3:37 pm - Mar 11, 2013


zoyler says:
Monday, March 11, 2013 at 15:25
0 0 Rate This
wottpi beat me to it. Who said McKenzie did not produce the result his clients wanted after a long drawn out process during which time the ‘restless natives’ had time to calm down.
Also echobhoy I understood it was an enquiry and not a trial. Was LNS not allowed to ask questions or if he was was he just very selective in the questions he asked?
Just too many things have gone the right way for one club for it not to smell to high heaven!

———————————————————-

Who was Bryson there on behalf of?

As I said if Harper Macleod get any further work from the “beaks” (and maybe even from Celtic) then surely we can only come to the conclusion that, “on the balance of probabilities”, they were part of the fix.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on3:43 pm - Mar 11, 2013


exiledcelt says:
Monday, March 11, 2013 at 14:55

Ecobhoy – understand your point – and the one about English FA is very valid and could have been used for/against as I understand Arsenal were the ones who ended up paying taxes – how these players were registered with FA we won’t know – but no one was charged with invalid registrations down south so assume part of the reason they were caught and paid the taxes was that they registered players properly with FA but improperly for EBTs.

However some other of your points to be addressed

Someone needed to find cash and coun’t raise it another way – this was done in a period covering over 10 years where for 6 of them BoS were given him money like sweets, plus others like ENC and Dave King gave him money no issues – so there was no need to have EBT as a way of getting cash

Getting out before the balloon burst – he did this over 10 years – no way he had it planned in 2001 to leave in 2011 – his legacy and ego would not allow him to think of failure.

Reason I think SDM was not worried about the SFA registrations was

(1) He never worried about Hector or police or Jersey regulators for any paperwork he did not want to give over – as per evidence given. He thought he had shredded and hidden everything

(2) I don’t believe in coincidences – both CO and Gordon Smith knew about EBTs – one was the workds greatest administrator, the other was an agent whose clients signed for RFC. Judging by George Peat’s behaviour, not too sure he was not privy to same info.

(3) Sold it to CW – for a pound.- if you were worried your “secrets” would be unearthed by a stranger, then you would hold onto it surely
——————————————————————————————————

On points to be addressed I tried to be clear in my original post that I was speaking in very general terms and not specifically about Murray. Many, much more able than myself, have been unable to understand the workings of the Murray Empire and I have no intention of attempting it although I wouldn’t necessarily agree with your statement: ‘there was no need to have EBT as a way of getting cash’. My reason is that the more ‘wealth’ someone has then the greater desire to accrue more in my experience. They never ever have enough.

On the other points you make you may well be correct but there are alternative explanations:
(1) He might well have ‘believed’ the schemes were legitimate and may well have ‘believed’ that the ‘notification’ given to the SPL was sufficient to meet the letter of the rules. The alleged ‘shredding’ came very late in the day and the side contracts were always going to exist in any case as evidence which could be used and indeed have been.
(2) I always examine ‘coincidences’ closely but sometimes they are just coincidences – no more no less.
(3) Surely (3) fails if you are correct in (1) and (2). I would also prefer to wait and see what the BDO and StrathPol investigations reveal as I honestly don’t feel I have enough facts to express an informed opinion on this at the moment.

Returning to English Football EBTs I think a number of clubs other than just Arsenal used EBTs but I’m not up to speed on who has agreed a settlement and who is holding-out although I have a feeling that they were all going to settle but I could be wrong there.

View Comment

Avatar

spanishceltPosted on3:54 pm - Mar 11, 2013


goosygoosy says:
Monday, March 11, 2013 at 11:12

On Sat Annan subbed a player immediately after the game entered the 3 min of extra time. The player walked slowly off the park but not any more slowly than happens with any other extra time sub Maybe 20 -30 secs at most
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Low and behold
The Rangers TV Commentator confidently stated that the Referee “will” add extra time for this time wasting tactic
And he did
He allowed 5 mins of extra time and an unjustified corner to boot
……………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………….
The Rangers game was the last game in all scottish divisions to end on Saturday, all other results were in by a good two minutes or more before full time was called at Ibrokes.

View Comment

Avatar

ExiledCeltPosted on3:57 pm - Mar 11, 2013


ecobhoy – thanks for the counter arguements – yes no 3 I was hesitant to put in, however I was thinking he must have been confident that things would not come back to bite him – so he sold to a know charletan anyway 9se AJ/Martin Bain’s report on this) not caring who it was taking over – this is when I think he showed his true colours knowing he was indeed untouchable

Good thing is that some day – at some time – the truth will come out and it will make a lot more sense that it does at the moment – until such times we can only speculate what the motives and conspiracies are………..

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on4:06 pm - Mar 11, 2013


zoyler says:
Monday, March 11, 2013 at 15:25

Also echobhoy I understood it was an enquiry and not a trial. Was LNS not allowed to ask questions or if he was was he just very selective in the questions he asked?
———————————————————————————————————–

LNS and his two colleagues were able to ask questions – that is normal practice.

I would hope that LNS and his colleagues would have been very selective in the questions asked as it should be on the evidence given with a view to amplifying that evidence, clarifying it, possibly extending the direction and resolving any ambiguities created. This is often done so that everyone in the proceedings understands exactly what the question is and also what the answer is. In a complex case that can be a lot more difficult than it sounds.

It’s very easy for different parties to have different perceptions as to what questions and answers actually mean and part of the role of a judge is to try and ensure that the interpretation is as clear as possible to all. Experienced judges are quite good at picking-up on what can create anomalies and in recognising pivotal bits of evidence.

LNS would have immediately recognised the legal significance of the Bryson Bombshell and that’s why IMO he asked McKenzie what the SPL position was. Because we don’t have a transcript or even full counsel submissions we don’t know what, if anything, Mure said on behalf of Rangers.

View Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.