Digging The Hole Ever Deeper

ByTrisidium

Digging The Hole Ever Deeper

Reblogged with kind permission of RTC as his blog is closed to posts. RTC will be writing a related blog for SFM in a day or so. Paul McConville has also prepared a new blog which will be posted in a day or so.

Our thanks to both RTC and Paul for their creative input.

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.

77 Comments so far

justafanPosted on12:06 am - Aug 10, 2012


It will be good to hear from the “gaffer” again

View Comment

TSFMPosted on12:11 am - Aug 10, 2012


I have been aware of a lot of trolling going on in the last few days. I have tried to remove posts which are basically just argumentative and SMF-baiting. I have also removed many posts which replied to those trolls.

Please be aware that these attacks will continue. Please try to place some trust in the moderators that they will deal with them. They are best ignored – especially when it is clear that there is no intention to debate, just to abuse.

Thanks for that folks.

View Comment

CortesPosted on12:20 am - Aug 10, 2012


Thanks TSFM for the re-post. May I suggest you give equal prominence to the BRTH you posted at 1900 last evening? 🙂 Keep up the good work!!!!

View Comment

Itsagoal!Posted on12:26 am - Aug 10, 2012


longtimelurker says: August 9, 2012 at 23:54

Interesting re FOI, Salmond, HMRC and Deid club FC

http://kerrydalestreet.co.uk/single/?p=11647767&t=8719788
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

lots of people depressed about how Sevco seem to be getting away with it over the last few days. The media trying to move us all along. In my opinion this post from Long Time Lurker remains the only way to get the public re-interested again in the Rangers(IA) saga.

£100M of taxpayers money has been written off for a football club – who are back as if nothing happened spending millions of pounds they don’t have. The silence from our politicians – or worse – the First Minister telling HMRC to “go easy on Rangers, because not just Scottish football, but Scottish society needs them” remains part of this scandal.

until ordinary people in Scotland realise that £100M of their money has been lost – we don’t stand a chance against the mainstream media

View Comment

SBhoyPosted on12:27 am - Aug 10, 2012


TSFM,
I must say, this is the place I come to since R took the decision to refrain, you must be having a hell of a time, dig down and keep it going, you and your team…yous know it’s worth it, and much appreciated.

View Comment

SBhoyPosted on12:29 am - Aug 10, 2012


Itsagoal! says:

August 10, 2012 at 00:26

0

0

Rate This

longtimelurker says: August 9, 2012 at 23:54

Interesting re FOI, Salmond, HMRC and Deid club FC

http://kerrydalestreet.co.uk/single/?p=11647767&t=8719788
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

lots of people depressed about how Sevco seem to be getting away with it over the last few days. The media trying to move us all along. In my opinion this post from Long Time Lurker remains the only way to get the public re-interested again in the Rangers(IA) saga.

£100M of taxpayers money has been written off for a football club – who are back as if nothing happened spending millions of pounds they don’t have. The silence from our politicians – orworse – the First Minister telling HMRC to “go easy on Rangers, because not just Scottish football, but Scottish society needs them” remains part of this scandal.

until ordinary people in Scotland realise that £100M of their money has been lost – we don’t stand a chance against the mainstream media

I Could not have said that better myself Its

View Comment

OzyhibbyPosted on12:34 am - Aug 10, 2012


A lot of talk about fairness in regards to revenue sharing. The fact is that without an away team there will be no game. Therefore the away team are entitled to demand payment for turning up and providing the entertainment for the paying public.
The SPL is a cartel which has the sole aim of getting as much cash as possible from it’s customers. How it is distributed is a gentlemans agreement between it’s members. If the clubs vote that all gates are to be shared equally between home and away clubs then it does not matter if some think it unfair or not.
Fact is that the eleven clubs would be mad not to make revenue redistribution a priority this season.
The current system is not working and has now reduced the SPL to a one horse race.
My own preference would be for:-

Gate money being shared between home and away team after the first 15,000 fans. (this allows home team to cover costs)

European prize and TV money to be shared equally among the clubs of the SPL.

TV money split equally among all the teams in the SPL.

A salary cap set at £6m per season with an allowance outside the cap for a club to keep a player brought through their own academy.

All of the above are perfectly legal and exist in other leagues in Europe at the moment. There is nothing to stop the SPL adopting them right now.
This would help to bring back a level of sporting parity to the league.

It would not be all bad news for Celtic.
They would still have the largest budget by a mile. They would still be able to hire the best coaches money can buy. They would be able to direct more money towards their already excellent academy programme.

This year Barcelona are anticipating being able to start both la liga and champs league games with teams entirely from their own academy. Ajax already do. Both team have better quality players than Celtic are trying to buy. There is nothing to stop Celtic doing the same.

It’s time for Scottish football to change.

View Comment

highlandjaggyPosted on12:34 am - Aug 10, 2012


Anyone know the timescale sevco have for paying football related money back to teams they owe money to and SFA fines.

View Comment

Philip José FarmerPosted on12:38 am - Aug 10, 2012


TSFM says:
August 10, 2012 at 00:05

RTC’s blog is now reblogged here for discussion.

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

This is just getting silly now.

View Comment

Itsagoal!Posted on12:42 am - Aug 10, 2012


here is the transcript of the FOI someone on Kerrydale St sent. Has anyone FOI’d the Scottish Government rather than HMRC?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From: Lorna Stevens

27 March 2012

Dear HM Revenue and Customs,

In a recent television interview the First Minister of Scotland
revealed that he had spoken to HMRC in relation to tax owing by Rangers Football
Club
Can you please send me all correspondence (including email
correspondence)between the First Minister’s office and HMRC on this
subject during the period from 2006 to 2012.

Can you please also send me all records that you have in relation
to telephone calls between the First Minister’s and HMRC on this subject during the period from 2006-2012.

Yours faithfully,

Lorna Stevens
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

HMRC said no……………………..
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Lorna Stevens left an annotation (12 May 2012)

There is very little point in having a foi act if government depts are going to behave like this.

Alex Salmond said in a TV interview that he had lobbied HMRC on behalf of Rangers FC

But HMRC refuse to give ANY information even to the extent of acknowledging that Alex Salmond had contacted them

It reminds me of the cold war era where the govt refused to acknowledge that the security services even existed

Transparency in government?

It will never catch on

View Comment

Doon the slopePosted on12:45 am - Aug 10, 2012


TSFM

You are doing a magnificent job.

Pars Fan

Re your point regarding the “Old Firm” buying up the best players from the smaller teams:

A few years ago I was one of the speakers, along with Craig Levein, at a fund-raising dinner at Tynecastle for Hearts youth teams. (I am not a Jambo but wanted to support young football players.)

At a question and answer session, Craig was asked about the point you make. He responded that he would be hypocritical to criticize Celtic or Rangers on that point because Hearts took the best players from Cowdenbeath and, he admitted that while manager at Cowdenbeath, he took the best players from the junior leagues. That’s football.

However, buying excellent players from rivals and then sitting them on the bench all season, or buying excellent players simply to stop your closest rivals from signing them – then sitting them on the bench all season, that’s not football.

View Comment

BunionPosted on12:59 am - Aug 10, 2012


Itsagoal! says:
August 10, 2012 at 00:26

First point ref the £100m of taxpayers money. Wouldn’t be so sure they’ve entirely got away with it, If true, then Duff & Phelps/Sevco have just created a template for every other company (never mind football club) in the land to clear their debts whilst retaining brand identity. The charge of ‘pheonix company’ will be blown out of the water forever.

Could you imagine the flood of cases v HMRC going through the courts from now until eternity? “But your honour, look at Rangers. If HMRC are OK with that why should we have to repay?” “Case dismissed”

That aside, the SFA would forever be culpable to the charge that they aided and abetted in the theft of said sum from the public purse.

Secondly, Salmond like any politician will kiss a baboons crusty ass if he thought it would win votes. Furthermore, his deputy’s seat is none other than Govan. What else is he to do but be seen to be fighting on their behalf. From a political strategists viewpoint, Glasgow is lost forever to the SNP if he doesn’t put up a fight.

More pertinently, do you imagine any other First Minister (of whatever hue) would have acted differently?

Ref the letters, if it can be shown that he didn’t send similar congratulatory letters to Celtic for their successes, then he would certainly be subject to further question.

I’d be willing to bet though that, from an independence viewpoint, he wouldn’t be too sad to see the focal point of the ‘quintessentially british club’ gone from the Scottish political scene.

View Comment

buckfastswallierPosted on1:06 am - Aug 10, 2012


In the last year, in the last few months particularly, Rangers, The Rangers, The Fecking Lone Rangers, Sevco, WATP, whatever they call themselves, have shown themselves up for what they are- an arrogant, vicious, and highly egotistical group of supporters who have an Orwellian approach to the facts.

View Comment

CassandraPosted on1:10 am - Aug 10, 2012


Ozyhibby
Take away the first 15,000 then share the gate? Looks like only one team will be doing the sharing then!

View Comment

BunionPosted on1:23 am - Aug 10, 2012


Final thought for tonight.

Which is more likely;

HMRC allow ‘Rangers’ to continue as before having been found guilty of £100m tax avoidance

or

Charlie Boy (on behalf of his consortium) rakes in £40m selling 20,000 season tickets @ £200 approx per head and, a further £15m-£20m selling off the property assets and, a further £5.6m selling the club to TBK then, he scarpers pronto like. £65m return on a £6m investment for 6 months work….. not half bad eh?

View Comment

grocerPosted on1:32 am - Aug 10, 2012


I still think that Mr Green is dubious in his proclamations around ” I am here for the long haul”. Only a few months ago he stated that he is involved in rangers and expects to walk away within approx 9 months in profit.

I still think this story will keep on giving for a good while.

View Comment

OzyhibbyPosted on1:33 am - Aug 10, 2012


Cassandra

I said at the beginning of my post that I thought that fairness was subjective.
This is about sporting parity.
We could go further. When you buy a NY Yankees shirt or a LA Raiders shirt the money goes to all the teams in the league.
A Celtic fans idea of Fairness will be Celtic keeping all of the money their fans bring to the game. An Aberdeen fans idea of fairness might be a chance to build a team that has a chance of winning the league without coming up against a team with ten times the budget.
It’s up to the clubs to agree the way forward but what is fair will only be a momentary consideration.

View Comment

grocerPosted on1:41 am - Aug 10, 2012


When will this whole charade end? Oldco, newco, fc rangers, lost history etc ! If this was a country without a major bias as to ‘establishments first’ we wouldn’t be having this debate!

View Comment

mohandiseenPosted on1:48 am - Aug 10, 2012


Bunion, I think you need to get your calculator out.

20,000 ST’s @ £200 is £4 million!

View Comment

ghirl1888Posted on1:51 am - Aug 10, 2012


highlandjaggy on August 10, 2012 at 00:34
 1 0 Rate This
Anyone know the timescale sevco have for paying football related money back to teams they owe money to and SFA fines.

————————–

I have read on here there was no deadline, therefore no consequences of not paying. It’s just not right is it?

View Comment

BunionPosted on1:53 am - Aug 10, 2012


mohandiseen says:
August 10, 2012 at 01:48

Wine, poor eyesight and no enough sleep makes for many a boo boo.

Mind you, £4m makes the case for their survival all the less likely then don’t it? 🙂

View Comment

stunneyPosted on2:22 am - Aug 10, 2012


http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/top-football-stories/league-cup-wins-remain-with-rangers-says-sfl-chief-1-2460379

View Comment

stunneyPosted on2:28 am - Aug 10, 2012


http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/sfl-division-three/rangers-manager-ally-mccoist-voices-support-for-potential-investment-from-newcastle-united-owner-mike-ashley-1-2458810

View Comment

stunneyPosted on2:35 am - Aug 10, 2012


http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/dundee-fans-snap-up-tickets-for-first-derby-in-seven-years.18414720

View Comment

scott hely (@scoaby7)Posted on3:06 am - Aug 10, 2012


Bunion @ 0123

£334 the rangers fan in my work paid for his season book, 30% off last year he said.

a fair bit dearer than most figures i’d heard touted, some clarity on the figure may help the beancounters work out how serious sevco are about balancing books.

View Comment

stunneyPosted on3:23 am - Aug 10, 2012


SFL chief David Longmuir said, “We’re totally comfortable with allowing The Gers to keep their League Cups even though they cheated like crazy to get them. The SFL clubs may have voted for sporting integrity when they put The Rangers in the Third Division. But I feel it balances things out a wee bit to have the club retain trophies it won by driving a double decker bus through that ideal. Our sponsors want to be associated with success, no matter how fraudulent, no matter how tainted it may be. Also, we don’t want any SFL investigation of Rangers’ nine-in-a-row, do we?”

SFA President Campbell “Soup” Ogilvie said of Longmuir’s stance he was “fine with it”.

SFA Chief Executive Stewart Regan could not be reached for comment.

View Comment

stevensanphPosted on3:50 am - Aug 10, 2012


stunney says:
August 10, 2012 at 03:23

It is great amazing that the SFL chief is coming out with quotes like this. So effectively, what he is saying is, that no matter what you do, once your awarded the win, you’ve won. If your later found cheating the SFL will take no action?

Why do we even have a rule book?

If there is anyone doubting what the agenda for this site should be, it should be to attack ‘changes’ to the rules like these, before they become accepted.

View Comment

wattylerPosted on6:30 am - Aug 10, 2012


1 step forward 2 back. I was looking forward to sell out saturday thinking i would be helping scottish football, but after reading the head of SFL quote that rules dont matter, im starting to think Scottish football deserves to die if people with no morals run and earn a living from it.

Need my faith restored here, why should i contribute to his wages.

View Comment

loamfeetPosted on6:56 am - Aug 10, 2012


thewestlight says:
August 10, 2012 at 02:15

How would it be if the players were owned by the league and were rotated through the teams?

——————————

Awful.

But we could combine all of our youth setups into a number of national academies owned by the footballing body, whose graduates are assigned to clubs as part of their first contract using a draft system with lowest placed clubs getting the first picks. The clubs are then entitled to sell the players on with a percentage of any fee going back into the youth development system.

View Comment

Charlie BrownPosted on7:00 am - Aug 10, 2012


It’s okay – all Longmuir has done with comments like those has put himself in the firing line.

How do you think fans of SFL clubs will feel reading comments like those?

We have to remember the SFL is ultimately a member run organisation as it’s the SFA / SPL / SFL management found to it’s cost when they torpedoed the SFL1 parachute plan.

If the fans of the SFL clubs are outraged enough, indeed if some of the SFL chairmen are outraged enough then one or more clubs can start a motion at SFL meetings and the members can then vote or decide if any trophies should be stripped or investigated.

Can Longmuir override his members without jeopardising his own position?

View Comment

MichaelPosted on7:09 am - Aug 10, 2012


As a season ticket holder at Celtic park, l find it difficult to comprehend my hard earned cash(believe me it is hard earned) that goes into my season book will somehow be given away to another club. For that clubs chairman to waste sorry invest in run of the mill oversea’s players.

I may be out of touch with the thoughts of most fans but l just can not see how the money l earn to put into y club should be given to say Kilmarnock or Hearts

Sponsors money, prize money yes but my wages no.

Michael

View Comment

BrendaPosted on7:17 am - Aug 10, 2012


Has Mr Lunny been given the dan mack?? Should be fun the next time anyone is hauled up in front of the beaks for ‘after match comments’ ??? Has charlie explained his ‘bigotry’ claims yet ( I believe he had a week ) and of course Sally and his rallying call to the peepil!!! Why doesn’t anyone who is called up, demand that these two incidents are dealt with first! WHY are every team just sitting back and accepting this low-life bunch of cheats are ploughing their way through the rule book? AM I MISSING SOMETHING VERY OBVIOUS ??? (especially hearts and the money owed for Lee Wallace, he shouldn’t be allowed to play!!!!)

View Comment

Lord WobblyPosted on7:19 am - Aug 10, 2012


stunney says:
August 10, 2012 at 02:22
5 0 Rate This
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/top-football-stories/
league-cup-wins-remain-with-rangers-says-sfl-chief-1-2460379
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As Stunney points out in a subsequent post, Longmuir has just given the green light to cheats. Competition my a*se!

As an aside, The Scotsman is currently not allowing comments:
“The ability to add comments has been temporarily disabled.
Thank you for your patience, service will return to normal
shortly.”

Just another reason why internet bampottery is so important.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on7:21 am - Aug 10, 2012


stevensanph says:
August 10, 2012 at 03:50
 8 0 Rate This
stunney says:
August 10, 2012 at 03:23

It is great amazing that the SFL chief is coming out with quotes like this. So effectively, what he is saying is, that no matter what you do, once your awarded the win, you’ve won. If your later found cheating the SFL will take no action?

Why do we even have a rule book?
————-

Could also be the reason many young people (and some of us older types) no longer consider football to be our main sport. In fact many young people may turn away from football for good as they see what’s going on here. Only a mug joins a card game if they know the deck is loaded.

The SFA, SFL and SPL may well get their Armageddon, but it’ll be one of their own making.

Apropos cheating, check out today’s story from the IOC. It’s not all about accomodating serial cheats.

“IOC: Hamilton to lose 2004 gold on Friday
American cyclist Tyler Hamilton will officially be stripped of his Athens 2004 Olympic gold medal on Friday as the IOC moves to close the case before the end of an eight-year statute of limitation.”

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/ioc-hamilton-lose-2004-gold-friday-115339907.html

View Comment

MDCCCLXXXVIIIPosted on7:21 am - Aug 10, 2012


Ozyhibby says:
August 10, 2012 at 00:34
5 12 Rate This
A lot of talk about fairness in regards to revenue sharing. The fact is that without an away team there will be no game. Therefore the away team are entitled to demand payment for turning up and providing the entertainment for the paying public.
The SPL is a cartel which has the sole aim of getting as much cash as possible from it’s customers. How it is distributed is a gentlemans agreement between it’s members. If the clubs vote that all gates are to be shared equally between home and away clubs then it does not matter if some think it unfair or not.
Fact is that the eleven clubs would be mad not to make revenue redistribution a priority this season.
The current system is not working and has now reduced the SPL to a one horse race.
My own preference would be for:-

Gate money being shared between home and away team after the first 15,000 fans. (this allows home team to cover costs)

European prize and TV money to be shared equally among the clubs of the SPL.

TV money split equally among all the teams in the SPL.

A salary cap set at £6m per season with an allowance outside the cap for a club to keep a player brought through their own academy.

All of the above are perfectly legal and exist in other leagues in Europe at the moment. There is nothing to stop the SPL adopting them right now.
This would help to bring back a level of sporting parity to the league.

It would not be all bad news for Celtic.
They would still have the largest budget by a mile. They would still be able to hire the best coaches money can buy. They would be able to direct more money towards their already excellent academy programme.

This year Barcelona are anticipating being able to start both la liga and champs league games with teams entirely from their own academy. Ajax already do. Both team have better quality players than Celtic are trying to buy. There is nothing to stop Celtic doing the same.

It’s time for Scottish football to change.

————————————————————————–

‘European prize and TV money to be shared equally among the clubs of the SPL.’

‘All of the above are perfectly legal and exist in other leagues in Europe at the moment’

Can you direct me to these ‘other leagues’ that distribute European monies earned by individual clubs. Thanks.

View Comment

Ian58Posted on7:24 am - Aug 10, 2012


Re Stunney’s link at 02:22.
Could the same journalist now ask Stewart Regan a similar question regarding the Scottish Cup?

View Comment

BrendaPosted on7:38 am - Aug 10, 2012


Moderation??? No banned words?? Is this common now?

View Comment

slimshady61Posted on7:39 am - Aug 10, 2012


Ozyhibby says:
August 10, 2012 at 00:34
—————————–
The unpalatable fact for you and many like you is that your chairmen sold out the fans a long time ago (would that they had sold out the seats in like manner)

The sell out took this form:-
(A) the clubs other than Celtic and the corpse agreed to have the home team retain all of the gate money in league matches in return for Celtic and the corpse agreeing to a league where each team plays the other 4 times a season (= 4 visits from Celtic & the corpse per annum, subsequently adjusted slightly by the “split”)

Be under no illusion, my team did not want a league where each team plays the other 4 times a season but it was forced upon them and this was the quid pro quo.

(B) the chairmen greedily eyed the pots of TV money and signed up to it; this made them lazy, their main customer was now Sky and not the paying customer; that leads to absurdities like Dundee U v Inverness live on TV on a Monday night, Hibs having 17 different kick off times last year etc.

So self-interest has ruled and the fans, particularly those of the smaller clubs, have been ignored.

That is until the past 3 months when, with the corpse’s demise, club chairmen suddenly realised the golden cow of Ian Croker & Davie Provan might be at risk and all that would be left were the fans…….and guess what, when they looked around, the fans were saying the complete opposite in terms of the corpse to what the chairmen were thinking.

So the past 8 weeks have seen the fans return to the top of the agenda – good; the issue now is to keep them there, make them the focal point because, as Jock Stein said, football without fans is nothing. So long as the fans are given priority, we can start to build the game back up again.

If they are ignored or taken for granted, the game will continue to suffer.

And no league is free of that risk. The CL is now so sterile and so biased towards the top clubs that attendances in the CL will inevitably start to drop as people tire of being fleeced for the same old, same old in the last 16, QF etc. of that competition.

The only people who can keep the fans at the top of the agenda are us, the fans, and we can start by going to a game tomorrow.

View Comment

Lord WobblyPosted on7:53 am - Aug 10, 2012


Man Utd lowers stock float value.
The lowering of the debut share price suggests that it could not find buyers at those higher prices.

The club currently has hundreds of millions of pounds of debt despite its sporting success.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19201427

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The club currently has sporting success because of it’s hundreds of millions of pounds of debt…

…might be another way of looking at it.

View Comment

Lord WobblyPosted on7:56 am - Aug 10, 2012


Man Utd lowers stock float value.
The lowering of the debut share price suggests that it could not find buyers at those higher prices.

The club currently has hvndreds of millions of pounds of debt despite its sporting success.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19201427

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The club currently has sporting success because of it’s hvndreds of millions of pounds of debt…

…might be another way of looking at it.

ps moderated for the ‘hvndred’ word. Who’d have thvnk it? 😀

View Comment

SparTicketusPosted on8:02 am - Aug 10, 2012


Mohandiseen & Bunion

Do you think Charlie has made the same mistake with his sums and maybe his whole business plan is a heap of steaming brown stuff ?

View Comment

FinlochPosted on8:43 am - Aug 10, 2012


Bill Longmuir is quoted “We are quite comfortable with the way we are treating the history of Rangers.” etc etc.

I know he’s just the gang spokesman and the quote was in the MSM but in the absence of informative journalism at “The Hootsmon” the questions I’d have like to see asked are…

Who exactly are the “we” who you say are comfortable Bill?
Is it you and your administrators?
Or you and your committee?
Or all the clubs?
Or just you and some like-minded pals?

And why are you comfortable Bill?
Is it because you’ve never debated it with people who might not agree with your wee decision making cabal?
By that I mean people like Mr Hutton from Raith Rovers and others who are not on your wee committee and I don’t think they would be “comfortable” with what you are dictating.

This is where democracy needs to kick in and why there is so much to do by every member club whether they are on Bill’s “Comfortable Committee” or not.

Our clubs need to tell Mr Longmuir and his committee if they agree or not with his “comfortable” stance as quoted because his job is to do what the clubs want and I’m not sure the majority are as “Comfortable” as he is.

But in the meantime and for the record on a key point of principle – as of now Mr Longmuir says he is quite comfortable.

View Comment

SparTicketusPosted on8:43 am - Aug 10, 2012


Ross 8.17

Okay – I’ll bite. At the risk of having my hand smacked by the TSFM mods…..

1. This interweb thingy is very big. You don’t need to spend time on this site.
2. You need to spend less time eavesdropping on the conversations of Girl Guides

View Comment

TimalloyPosted on8:54 am - Aug 10, 2012


TSFM, on subject of trolls I agree do not respond to them let them troll away unrecognised.
Also in my opinion, these sad guys are probably 2 or 3 eejits using different tags to make it look like there are more of them, to paraphrase troll above “move on with your sad newco lives”

View Comment

TheOncomingStormPosted on8:59 am - Aug 10, 2012


Nice one SparTicketus,

I don’t have your wit or vocabulary so I was just going to tell him to F**k off. 😉

On the subject of Longmuir, presumably speaking for the entire SFL, saying that it’s perfectly hunky dory that oldco won those League Cups using ‘creative’ registrations. Can we now assue that along with Doncaster, Regan, et al, his jaiskit will also be on a shoogly peg?

View Comment

ZilchPosted on9:04 am - Aug 10, 2012


TSFM

Thanks for reposting the latest RTC blog – looking forward to further new headline articles!!

So, RTC has outlined in the clearest possible terms how the EBT scheme worked and how it breached both tax law and the laws governing Scottish football.

This is a direct challenge to the story being touted, this week, by David Murray, the man behind the EBT scheme, one of Scotland’s highest profile businessmen and former owner of ‘the most successful team in the world’.

So why the deafening silence from the mainstream media? Why doesn’t G. Speirs (or some other football journalist) do a side by side comparison of the RTC claim against the Murray statement? He could restrict his thoughts to the footballing side of the question if the tax is beyond him.

Why do none of the Herald’s or the BBC’s highly qualified business analysts apply some of their expertise to this question? An objective, clear explanation of the relevant tax law and even a basic analysis of the available data would be a suitable background to commenting on Murray’s statement.

This is the biggest sporting scandal in Scotland in years, probably ever. It is also a massive business scandal.

With a few notable exceptions, the MSM have failed in their duty to shine a spotlight on this industrial scale (probable) tax evasion and undoubted massive corruption of our national game. Failure to challenge the Murray statement is only the latest example of this failure.

One can only wonder why that is…

View Comment

jammy dodgerPosted on9:10 am - Aug 10, 2012


TSFM, just a suggestion. Rather than posting a link to RTC’s article, would it be possible to post the whole text, with an appropriate acknowledgement, of course. I feel this would make for simpler navigation, and would ensure that more people read the whole article.

View Comment

IndefiniteArticlePosted on9:13 am - Aug 10, 2012


Ok. I call on any other club, in the next round of the league cup, to field an ineligible player and we’ll sit back and watch what happens.

View Comment

mirrenmanPosted on9:25 am - Aug 10, 2012


I volunteer to be the St.Mirren ineligible player. Now where are my boots

View Comment

stunneyPosted on9:30 am - Aug 10, 2012


http://www.sportinglife.com/football/news/article/165/7978922/conte-banned-for-10-months

View Comment

helpmaboabPosted on9:32 am - Aug 10, 2012


Ross @ 08.17

David Longmuir states that he’s comfortable about newco/oldco retaining League Cup titles despite the fact that they cheated their way to winning them.Of course, we all know where his allegiance lies .The game in this country of ours is rotten to the core when the powers that be do everything possible to maintain a club riddled with dishonesty.Already we see and hear a toadying and compliant media slavering at the thought that the good times are coming back.
The vested interests would be happy to close the book and ‘move on’. However,this site and others like it will not allow the most disgraceful period in Scottish football to go unchallenged and be airbrushed from history.
I am comfortable with the fact that I’m a litttle part of that.

Internet Bampot Loud And Proud!

View Comment

Itsagoal!Posted on9:35 am - Aug 10, 2012


Dear Mr Longmuir,

Your failure to investigate the previous League Cups being won unfairly is a scandal.

BUT as we the taxpayers are the sponsors of the League Cup we do not accept your decision.

We will write to the First Minister, who you remember handed you a £1.7M cheque of our money two weeks ago, and £1M of our money last season as the main sponsor of the trophy, and tell him to tell you to investigate

Scottish.ministers @scotland.gsi.gov.uk [no space after ministers]

yours

The Taxpayers (the people currently owed £100M)

View Comment

helpmaboabPosted on9:37 am - Aug 10, 2012


Indefinite Article @9.13

Brilliant idea.

View Comment

jockybhoyPosted on9:48 am - Aug 10, 2012


Kilgore Trout says: August 10, 2012 at 07:24
Re Stunney’s link at 02:22.
Could the same journalist now ask Stewart Regan a similar question regarding the Scottish Cup?

TBH I’d prefer the investigation to be completed before the authorities talk sanctions. I think they should do some sort of due process. Rats fight hardest when boxed into a corner…

View Comment

StarofdavidPosted on9:49 am - Aug 10, 2012


Decided not to pay my suppliers this year. The tax man can go screw too

Didn’t use any face painters and NEVER buy MSM papers tho so no bill at the newsagents down the road.

Wonder how long before I go to jail?

View Comment

redlichtiePosted on9:52 am - Aug 10, 2012


Lord Wobbly says:
August 10, 2012 at 07:56
Man Utd lowers stock float value.
The lowering of the debut share price suggests that it could not find buyers at those higher prices. The club currently has hvndreds of millions of pounds of debt despite its sporting success. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19201427

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The club currently has sporting success because of it’s hvndreds of millions of pounds of debt…

…might be another way of looking at it…

————————————————————————————————————-

I think the Man Utd example is slightly different in that the Glazers loaded a previously fairly debt-free club with substantial debt in order to pay for their purchase of the club. Some of this debt was at very high interest rates and that combined with fees taken out of the club by the Glazers has severely depleted the transfer budget.

That Ferguson has still managed to deliver success in this era is a tribute to his footballing expertise.

The relative failure of the IPO after a number of attempts to float elsewhere probably reflects the lack of financial reward (no dividends) and poor voting rights (10% of the rights of the Glazers own shares).

To be honest I wonder how they found so many gullible people and Charles Green must be looking on enviously.

/ Red Lichtie

View Comment

Dark BluePosted on9:58 am - Aug 10, 2012


Good bye Scottish League Cup. Boycotted for institutionalised corruption.

View Comment

BrendaPosted on9:59 am - Aug 10, 2012


Previous post in moderation regarding this subject? Anyway mr compliance has been very quiet since sally’s rabble rousing incident and charlie’s big-0-try accusation, ( I believe he had to till tuesday to explain) will be interesting the first time any member of any of Scottish football team is called up in front of the beaks! could they say ‘why don’t you deal with your ‘backlog’ first. And unless I’m missing something very obvious why are hearts especially, sitting back and allowing cheats fc to field a player they still have to pay for??? Why are this lot being allowed to plough through the rule book? What can we do to halt this? 🙁

View Comment

Carl31Posted on10:02 am - Aug 10, 2012


Bunion says:
August 10, 2012 at 00:59

Bunion,
you get my thumbs up simply for the ‘baboon’s crusty ass’ line. :O)

View Comment

Charlie BrownPosted on10:06 am - Aug 10, 2012


Slimshady you are slightly off with your opinion & timings that home clubs keeping the gate money was quid pro quo for Celtic & Rangers agreeing to a 10 team SPL and 4 games each per season.

The 10 team SPL was introduced in time for 1975-76 season but gate-sharing wasn’t abandoned until the beginning of 1981-82 season.

Why was there a 6/7 year gap?

Well the 10 team SPL was introduced in an attempt to try to reverse crowds that had been declining ever since the early 1960’s from the all time high crowds enjoyed through the forties and fifties. It was thought that the top ten teams playing each other 4 times per season would lead to more big games between the bigger teams and also intended to prevent long periods of domination as had recently happened when Celtic dominated the title between 1965 and 1974.

And it worked for probably about the first decade when the titles were shared between Celtic 4, Aberdeen 3, Rangers 2 and Dundee Utd 1 which also co-incided with the New Firm clubs having the best teams and best managers in their history with Rangers often pushed down to 4th place and lower in 1985-86 when Hearts can within a whisker of making it 5 different SPL winners in a decade and Rangers scraped into 5th place.

Fans eventually became bored with the repetitive fixture list year after year but it achieved it’s objective to begin with by making the league more competitive and stablising and reversing falling attendances.

So WHY the change to abandoning gate-sharing?

Well in the late seventies and early eighties Rangers completely rebuilt Ibrox into a modern safe stadium as they promised they would do after the Ibrox disaster to prevent further similar loss of lives.

Having built and financed a new stadium and with quite a poor team on the pitch as the Cup Winners Cup winning team was breaking up and many Gers legends retiring Rangers needed a way to ensure they got the crowd money to pay for stadium reconstruction. Their crowds remained poor as did their on pitch results and performances until Souness arrived and transformed everything in 1986 but at the beginning of the decade Rangers lobbied hard for the change in revenue sharing and Campbell Ogilvie managed to convince enough clubs that it would be to their advantage in keeping their own gates.

The answer as to why this was possible is that attendance levels at Parkhead & Ibrox were only slightly over half what they are now whilst the other clubs had bigger capacity stadiums than they do now which allowed bigger crowds in for the bigger games so the financial dynamics were different then than they are now. Today only Celtic, Rangers & Hearts would be net contributors in a gate sharing system but in the 70’s/80’s with a different mix of crowd levels more of the bigger clubs were net contributors than recipients so it was in their financial interest to change to keeping their own gate money.

Celtic’s Desmond White was against the change for a long time and he warned against the consequences of changing ie that it would damage the smaller clubs against the rich just as he later did when he argued against other changes to the revenues to be split between the top clubs and smaller clubs and also the damaging consequences letting TV have too much influence over football. Having played for Albion Rovers and Queens Park as a goalkeeper it seemed to me that he often would defend those clubs interests as much as Celtics but perhaps that was the Celtic way of his generation?

Anyway from memory the result of the vote in the end was approx 22 for and 13 or 15 against with the rest abstaining. You didn’t get to know how your club had voted in those days as it was secret ballot but given White’s comments I would think it was unlikely that Celtic voted for it but perhaps other people might know better?

The consequences of abandoning sharing the gate money was that it completely consolidated the financial gulf between Rangers, Celtic and the rest and over time this gulf has widened exponentially. Other clubs ability to compete has diminished as have their attendance levels whilst for the most part over the last 25 years it has enabled Rangers & Celtic once they ditched the old board and rebuilt the stadium to go from strength to strength. Add into the mix new Celtic and the other SPL clubs buying into the long proposed Rangers idea and plans for a breakway top league in line with the English Premier League and built into that skewed voting and financial distribution and we end up with the mess we have today.

Thrown into the mix over the period the bosman ruling and the hugely inflationary effect this had on wages plus vastly increased money pumping into the game from Television and indirectly via UEFA Champions League money and the distortion and anti-competitiveness baked into the structure of Scottish football is complete.

View Comment

TMWTLPosted on10:19 am - Aug 10, 2012


Things must be getting very desperate down Edmiston Drive way, after Green’s latest press release a short while ago

Methinks those season book sales are not meeting the targets that Green + Co need

View Comment

Charlie BrownPosted on10:25 am - Aug 10, 2012


TMWTL says:
August 10, 2012 at 10:19
0 0 Rate This

No offence but could you please provide a link otherwise some people reading won’t know what your on about? Ta. 🙂

View Comment

Torrevieja JohnbhoyPosted on10:32 am - Aug 10, 2012


Morning all.
Where to start!
So Longmuir basically states that as far as the SFL are concerned(He did say “we’re comfortable”) the old and new RFC are one and the same.This is backed up by the SFL site carrying all “honours” won by oldco,who were also allowed to call themselves Rangers and not Sevco in their game against Brechin.I’m not sure this is what the SFL chairmen voted for.
Is Longmuir now declaring that RFC were in fact relegated and Sevco are irrelevant.If so,I expect RFC to start the new season on -25pts,same as Dundee when still in administration.I’m not holding my breath,though.
I liked this bit.”RFC games to have a 4th official for the benefit of TV”.
What difference does this make to SKY?.
Except for a wee guy holding up the subs board this makes no difference at all.It does,however,allow the officials to to reprimand managers,coaches to advise the referee,who Longmuir admits they were quite happy to run the game,as to any alleged infringement either on or off the pitch.I wouldn’t be too happy if I was a manager in this league,knowing that I could be reprimanded by an official who is only there to keep the TV people happy whilst other managers,at other games,face no such action.
WRT any action by HMRC,BDO,I think we can forget anything that’ll impact on Sevco.HMRC are quite willing to write off £100m in this case.why,I don’t know but it seems to be the case.BDO will be going after the previous owners and I don’t think will care what happens to Sevco.
The one think I can’t work out,however,is the position of EUFA/FIFA.Will they just turn their backs on years of cheating on and off the pitch,especially when Euro matches and Internationals are involved.I was off the opinion that the SFA/SPL/SFL would act correctly not because the wanted to,but because they would have to.They’ve shown us that not only do they care about the fans,the clubs,HMRC,the CoS,their own independent panels,they also will ignore the worlds governing bodies.
The MSM think exactly the same.We have to try to get this story mainstream,however.if we could get a couple of heavy hitters asking the right questions the atory would soon write itself.Maybe we should start a Facebook page.Word can spread rapidly through there.
Anyway,I’m away to compose a couple of E-Mails to Longmuir etc.I’ll let you know if I get any replies.

View Comment

TheBlackKnightPosted on10:40 am - Aug 10, 2012


ok…. ok… before hysteria sets in…….. shall we look at what Mr Longmuir actually said?

taken from the Hootsman:

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/top-football-stories/league-cup-wins-remain-with-rangers-says-sfl-chief-1-2460379

“We are very comfortable with the position we have adopted,” said Longmuir.

“The history of Rangers is appropriately described on the SFL website.”

Asked to clarify this, he added: “We are quite comfortable with the way we are treating the history of Rangers.”

It does not say it will not be changed. Nor does it say they will not be stripped, if guilty. In fact I read the opposite of what many have suggested. I read it as the SFL are quite comfortable with the history as nothing has been proven otherwise. They are quite right to have the titles shown. “We are were we are” to coin a phrase.

The unnamed ‘report’ goes on to describe the, I can only surmise as being, ‘personal’ feeling that no punishment will be forthcoming as the SFL supremo has said he is comfortable with the listing of their titles as they stand.

Stripping titles is neither a punishment or a sanction. IT IS A CONSEQUENCE!

…………………. A very poor quality article from the Scotsman!

View Comment

AllyJamboPosted on10:45 am - Aug 10, 2012


Well it looks like Bill Longmuir has done a Doncaster and lowered the value of the Scottish League Cup in a very similar fashion to the way that Doncaster’s ‘Armagedon’ pronouncement did to the SPL! I wonder how this season’s sponsors feel about that? Strange too, that while the Rangers’ apologists continue to push the ‘innocent until proven guilty’ mantra, Longmuir has seen fit to announce ‘no punishment if/when found guilty’. Even stranger is the fact he’s felt compelled to make any pronouncement now when, for once, ‘no comment’ would have been perfectly correct, unless, of course, he knows that it is ‘when’ and not ‘if’. Looks to me like TRFC are in the league they always thought they were in, the one that lets THEM off with massive cheating and finds the rules bent or ignored whenever required.

On a slightly more positive note, looks like he wasn’t fooled by the SDM statement either!

View Comment

Charlie BrownPosted on11:00 am - Aug 10, 2012


Cheers BP I wasn’t aware that PMcC had done a guest post when I posted. 🙂

View Comment

tearsofjoyPosted on11:05 am - Aug 10, 2012


And no league is free of that risk. The CL is now so sterile and so biased towards the top clubs that attendances in the CL will inevitably start to drop as people tire of being fleeced for the same old, same old in the last 16, QF etc. of that competition
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I can’t quote the viewing figures off hand or provide a source to back up my claim but I am very sure there has been a steady decline in viewing figures of CL games over quite a long period . I have seen articles re this issue in the media in the last couple of years. So much so , UEFA changed the format to reduce the number of meaningless games and remove the second group stage nonsense. But it hasn’t worked as far as I know and certainly in the UK , viewing figures for this sham continue to fall.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on11:12 am - Aug 10, 2012


TheBlackKnight says:
August 10, 2012 at 10:40
 1 0 Rate This
ok…. ok… before hysteria sets in…….. shall we look at what Mr Longmuir actually said?
——————-

Fair point TBK. These words are actually the jouno’s twist on the statements, not a verbatim quote. The disturbing bit seems to be the last part of this sentence, which seems to be the journo’s own words, not Longmuir’s.

“David Longmuir confirmed that he was “comfortable” with the stance they have chosen to adopt, which is that Rangers’ history remains intact whether they are found guilty or not.”

An attempt to put words into Longmuir’s mouth? Wonder who wrote the piece?

View Comment

SouthernExilePosted on11:18 am - Aug 10, 2012


TheBlackKnight says:
August 10, 2012 at 10:40
 1 0 Rate This
ok…. ok… before hysteria sets in…….. shall we look at what Mr Longmuir actually said?

——————————–

TBK – entirely agree, it seems we are being treated to another msm disinformation blitz.

On the stv site:

“The SPL said that if found to be in breach of the rules, a range of 18 possible sanctions could apply, with the retrospective stripping of league titles among the more severe options.

However speaking after the draw for the second round of the League Cup, Longmuir said: “We [The Scottish Football League] are very comfortable with the position we have adopted.

“The history of Rangers is appropriately described on the SFL website.””

Pure sophistry in that “however” in the middle para!

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on11:20 am - Aug 10, 2012


Charlie Brown says:
August 10, 2012 at 10:06
————–

Bravo. Well wriitten piece.

This subject deserves a guest blog and thread of its own at some point on TSFM. You might be the very man to write that guest blog based on what you’ve presented above 😉

View Comment

bluPosted on11:32 am - Aug 10, 2012


Thumbs up to TheBlackNight and Danish Pastry for actually reading the (unattributed) Scotsman article with the sub-heading “League Cup wins remain with Rangers, says SFL chief”. This is the kind of nonsense that TSFM should discuss and challenge and it’s a shame that a number of posters just swallow it whole. Within the article content David Longmuir is quoted noting that the SFL currently reflects an accurate position with regard to the number of League Cup wins attributed to Glasgow Rangers FC. The writer provides no evidence for his/her assertion that that will remain the case should Glasgow Rangers FC be found guilty following the SFA investigation into player registrations in the period 2001-2010. I’d expect Mr Longmuir to have been quoted verbatim if he’d given this commitment on behalf of the SFL board.

Keep up teh good word TSFM.

View Comment

longtimelurkerPosted on11:40 am - Aug 10, 2012


Charlie Brown says:
August 10, 2012 at 10:06
14 3 Rate This

________________________________________________________________

Great post and thanks however the league set up was changed because Celtic were too successful.

View Comment

jammy dodgerPosted on11:46 am - Aug 10, 2012


Charlie Brown says:
August 10, 2012 at 10:06

A great post, which sums up the situation brilliantly. (Why it immediately attracted 2 TDs is just one of life’s little mysteries)

The SPL “experiment” has been an abject failure, an unmitigated disaster for Scottish football. Those who disagree with that statement need to look at the standing both of our clubs and the national side at the international level. Where it really went wrong was the SDM idea that he could replicate the Man Utd model in Scotland by buying in star players on stellar salaries. Of course there never was, never could have been and never will be enough money in the Scottish game to support such a model. The desperate attempt to buy European success lead directly to the taxpayer paying £100m for Sir David’s folly.

Why isn’t there enough money in the Scottish game? Well that’s easily answered, Scotland has a population of under 6 million. And all of the money in the game (TV money and sponsorship included) has to come, in effect, from that base.

So we have to live within our limited means, and that means creating a healthy, fair and competitive league setup. Perpetuating the current setup can only result in a Celtic procession to the title until such time as Sevco arrive in the SPL, at which point it’s back to business as usual. That is the heartfelt desire of the Sevco chorus in the MSM. Which is just one more good reason why I don’t want a return to the old days.

What we should do is have a look at those countries in Europe which are close in size to Scotland, and still manage to be successful internationally. Holland and Portugal stand out immediately. What are they doing right? How are they structured? Both these countries seem to have an endless supply of talented players coming through their system. Sure, the best ones quickly go abroad, but they don’t seem to struggle to find quality replacements from within their own country.

I don’t know enough about football in either country to supply any answers- maybe someone on here can help? But I see the finished product, at club and international level, and I think, why can’t Scottish football be like that? Either the Scottish gene pool has gone to pot over the last 30 years (unlikely!) or our game is currently structured in such a way as to hold us back.

Time for a radical rethink, and if nothing else, this whole Sevco saga should stimulate some thought about where we are, and where we want to be. Where I for one certainly don’t want to be is back to where we were a couple of years back. Yet that is exactly where the MSM want to take us.

View Comment

Charlie BrownPosted on12:10 pm - Aug 10, 2012


Jammy Dodger

You could fairly say that the whole Souness & Murray revolution was built on the following 5 things

1. Expensively assembled football teams by paying in Scottish terms exorbitant wages & transfer fees.

PAID FOR BY

2. 45K-50K full houses and retention of 100% of gate money – the Souness revolution would have been much harder to afford and finance had gate-sharing never been abolished and Rangers had to hand approx 40% of these huge crowd receipts to the away team as thye did only 5 years previously. They wouldn’t have been able to put as much clear blue sky between themselves and Celtic / Aberdeen / Hearts / Dundee Utd etc over whom they became immediately and completely dominant until Fergus McCann arrived and rebuilt Celtic along a similar scale.

3. Debt – David Murray’s seemingly never ending line of credit with Bank of Scotland enabled Rangers as a stroke to buy success or borrow their way out of any trouble.

4. Champions League money – this was both a blessing and a curse for Rangers as it provided financial cover for (and initiated) a multitude of sins and poor financial management.

5. Tax-cheating, financial doping and undisclosed payments to players – the subjects of the Rangers Tax case that hastened their financial downfall, eventual liquidation and newco beginning in the 4th Division of Scottish Football and could/should see them stripped of many of the trophies they won by their misuse of EBT’s and flouting football rules.

View Comment

ghirl1888Posted on12:23 pm - Aug 10, 2012


The SFL chief says rangers (IA) titles will remain, isn’t this an SPL investigation? what does Longmuir have to do with an SPL investigation?

View Comment

Comments are closed.