It has taken a year longer than predicted, but a critical appraisal of TRFC’s progress through the lower leagues must include recognition of the improvements on the playing field made under the new manager Mark Warburton. SFM usually precludes lengthy discussion on subjective issues like relative abilities of players and managers and referees, but on this subject, and by any objective standard, that is a given.
It is therefore right that he and his players should receive the congratulations of us all at SFM.
It has to be said that, despite the pitfalls, man-traps and honey-pots that remain to be successfully negotiated by the Rangers board, they have implemented their own stark version austerity, contrary to their rhetoric, whilst managing the expectations of their supporters. Perhaps some of what we have come to term “reasonable” Rangers fans would argue that the lack of humility still evident in the demeanour of the TRFC board is an essential part of managing those fans whilst imposing the austerity package on them.
Much like a political party conference, a football board has to play to it’s core support as well as the rest of the country.
How that will pan out is anybody’s guess, just like the random bagatelle that is the “TRFC in Court” saga.
There is also the existential problem to deal with. Many TRFC fans bought into the ‘same club’ myth at the outset, not because they actually believed it, but because it suited them, and because it served as an understandable GIRUY to the rest of us. With the passage of time, the suspension of disbelief, even in that constituency, is now complete and arguably irreversible. The problem for them is that the rest of have not subscribed to that rather bizarre set of contradictions. No other club has to have the “company that operates” prefix. Nor does any other club compel observers to skirt around the facts and search for a form of words acceptable to both sides of a mutually exclusive argument. In short, and existentially, the new Rangers don’t fit into the same kind of comfortable groove that other clubs do.
All of these problems for the new club, and many more, will exercise our minds to a greater or lesser extent moving forward, depending on how sensitive our outrage thresholds are to the various legal and Jungian issues. However we at SFM need to focus our sights on those whose maladministration of football gave rise to those problems in the first place – the SFA, SPFL, and by extension, the clubs – all of them.
Here are some facts;
- The SFA award clubs a licence to participate in UEFA competitions.
- The licence is only to be awarded if the applicant club has no unpaid tax debts.
- Both the club and the SFA have responsibility to notify UEFA of any debts (belt and braces routine in case the club ‘forgets’ to notify the SFA).
- In 2011, one club applied for and was awarded a UEFA licence.
- That club had accepted debts to HMRC – which were outstanding and overdue.
- These facts have been in the public domain since 2012,and were brought to the attention of ALL clubs in Scotland as well as the SFA.
- Nothing has been done by any club, or the SFA, to investigate the claim at #5
- SFA Chief Executive Stewart Regan, when asked by an SFM member what he would do if these claims could be substantiated, said; “Nothing!”
- All clubs will be within a few weeks, issuing season ticket renewal forms.
The story contained in points 6 and 7 above is a lengthy and protracted one.
From sources inside two clubs I have been informed that the problem here is subversive and obsessive fans, who don’t represent the vast body of fans generally. On points 1-5, my sources refused to comment. Conversations with SFA officials and print journalists yield the same reaction, with the addition that it is “just Celtic fans obsessed with Rangers” making the claims.
The lesson, if there is one worthy of the name, is that the bearers of the message need to attacked, and the message itself ignored. We could speculate why that is, but that would be to fall into the trap, taking our eye off the ball.
Perhaps I am being naïve, but my inference is that the SFA and clubs have no intention of doing anything about what was at best incompetence on an unbelievable scale, or at worst corruption. A source at Celtic Park was complaining in victim-like fashion to SFM that many Celtic fans were threatening to close their season book accounts over this issue, and that Rangers might have 45,000 SBs next season whilst Celtic could be down to as low as 20,000.
It had never occurred to him that actually supporting an investigation into SFA malpractice would add another 10,000 to the SB takeup.
Overall, the clubs and the SFA want us to believe that an investigation into this licensing issue is a Celtic or Rangers thing. It is neither of those.
An investigation, even if finds that corruption or incompetence has taken place cannot harm Rangers – old or new. There are no titles to strip here. The licence has been used and thrown away, so it cannot be “un – awarded”.
The only people who have anything to lose out of this are those individuals who allowed it to happen – those who our clubs seem so keen to protect.
More importantly, an investigation may be the catalyst for changes in procedures at the SFA to ensure that rigorous accountability is enforced -accountability that the clubs are eager to avoid.
Are we wrong? I hope we are not foolish enough to imagine that everything we believe is set in stone. I am confident that we are correct in our assumptions and in our interpretation of the facts, but please, let’s hear the counter-argument. Thus far, not one word of rebuttal save the usual invective reserved for the messenger has been uttered.
So what do we do? For me it is simple. If we really love our sport, and do nothing, the sport is lost to us completely and irrevocably.
If our view that sporting integrity has been killed off by those in charge of the game is correct, we lose nothing by embarking on a season ticket boycott. However by doing so we may awaken those in charge to the realities of our power as fans and prioritise in their minds the need to listen to what we say.
My view? if they ignore us, they can take their industry that they pretend is sport, and put it somewhere away from my reach. I neither want it nor need it.
If enough of us feel the same way, we WILL get a clean game. If we are as few as the MSM claim we are, at least we will have freed ourselves from a bent one.
I won’t be buying any more season books until I see these issues addressed. It certainly is tough love, but it is the only way for me. And it is driven by love – a love of the game I spent decades supporting, thinking that on the whole it was played on a level playing field. Certainly not driven by a sneering disregard for truth and integrity and a worship of acquisition.
Maybe it’s not just the end of Rangers’ journey then. Certainly if it’s not the end of ours, we find ourselves at a crossroads. The fans, the clubs, and Rangers too. The decision we make over the next few months may determine the future of our clubs, our sport, our Saturday afternoons.
I can tell you this though. Even when the dark facts are laid before us starkly as this, and when football is at the mercy of those who really do hate sport for its own sake, it is worth mentioning the common thread of decency and purpose we have all shared here on SFM, the friendships we have forged, and the love of football we have demonstrated.
REIVERAPRIL 22, 2016 at 12:13 29 3 Rate This
Apologies for taking so long folks but I decided to do a reformat of the printouts to be left on public transport etc to make them a more convenient size for carrying. They are now ready for download at
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B_X7aVh2s6qcQTA5X0t5b1lwQ0U
They are named Busdropback and Busdropfront. The original poster and handouts are still there also.
Can I suggest again that you buy a pack of printer card from the £1 shop and use that as it is less easy for it to be screwed up into a ball and thrown away.
Thanks.
——————————–
will be going to the game tomorrow, if you see me handing out handouts. Please take one and say hello
We may wish to keep an eye on up and coming teenage referee Russell Anderson, if his twitter timeline is anything to go by. https://twitter.com/Im_Rodger
Strangely, he has a pie and bovril account as Im_Rodger, where he claims to be a Hamilton Accies fan, even starting the season thread for Accies last summer. On their politics forum he has said he’ll be voting Conservative/Conservative so it seems likely to deduce that they are one and the same person. His twitter, for those who cannot access it, is wall to wall Pro Rangers and Anti Celtic. Not a crime of course but a little thoughtless for a budding referee, who, from his Facebook, seems to already be well up the SFA ladder.
After the Aberdeen result Cluster you should have time to give everyone in the ground one(cards obviously unless you are particularly excited
) and still not miss the part where the league is won.
An interesting blog post from Aberdeen supporter, Bob Smith Walker, on CQN. It looks at something that I find quite ridiculous, the way the SMSM completed a U-turn on the death of Rangers without one effort to explain what was revealed to them to cause the change of heart.
The change of heart came about, of course, immediately after the man they all now know as a liar and charlatan, Charles Green, did his own U-turn on the matter, and who now, of course, says he didn’t buy the club, just a basket of assets. The court, and in particular, the judge, in which Green’s counsel stated this second change of heart, agreed with him, which would suggest that his second change has more than a grain of truth about it. This, too, has never been analysed by any journalist, or at least none have published their analysis if they had had the wit to do the research.
Bob Smith Walker doesn’t make the following point, though I have made it previously and believe it to be true, that if there was any truth in the claim that ‘Rangers’ didn’t die, then the media would have published the evidence of that truth, loud and clear, long ago – and enjoyed making fools of us all in the process.
Instead all they’ve ever said on the matter is to quote that man they now abhor (though recently they do tend to leave out the fact that it was Charles Green who introduced the ‘same club’ notion – I suspect they’ve erased that awkward fact from their minds).
http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/scottish-medias-hokey-cokey/
As its the man’s anniversary I thought this apt from Hamlet;
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,And thus the native hue of resolutionIs sicklied o’er with the pale cast of thought,And enterprise of great pitch and momentWith this regard their currents turn awryAnd lose the name of action
4/6/2016
Dear Mr. Bankier Chairman Celtic Football Club,
I would like to bring to your attention to the fact I will not be renewing my season ticket after many years.
I cannot tell you how much this upsets me and my family.
I have supported Celtic for over 50 years and I am totally dismayed at the club’s inaction regarding the corruption in Scottish football and the lack of action against the SFA in connection with Resolution 12 and the actions of Regan, Doncaster, Ogilvie, Peat AND Dickson to name a few.
I have learned to live with the bias against Celtic but have never accepted it. I believed in the statements from John Reid that enough is enough and we should be treated without fear or favor.
Seven of my family and friends have held season tickets and have attended Celtic games together for over 30 years we are now down to three season tickets holders.
With bitter regret there will be none after this season.
I do think the board have achieved remarkable financial results given the current overall problems we have in Scotland and the very poor deals by the SFPL and the SFA.
However, I believe you and the board have lacked leadership in respect of fair play and to defend the club, the supporters, shareholders and Scottish football.
I will remain a shareholder and continue to support Celtic and the various charities however I am deeply disappointed with the Celtic boards lack of positive action over the last few years.
If no significant action is taken by the club over the next few months, I will sell the shares and actively work with people to organize change in Scottish football and in the governance of our club.
regards,
INCREDIBLEADAMSPARKAPRIL 23, 2016 at 18:04
UPTHEHOOP, you obviously don’t have a high opinion of the BBC or their pundits/presenters and that’s fair enough. But your examples are clearly not anyone claiming Rangers will dominate next year and that’s where I’ll leave it.
=========================
Clearly we are not going to ever agree on this. My point is simply that following a drawn cup tie which ended with Rangers winning on penalties, the national broadcaster saw fit to portray it as a seismic shift in Scottish football, and kept up this stance for an entire week. Any dissenting opinion was ridiculed, not respected (see my previous post about Paul McStay). History shows that cup ties are rarely an indicator as to how a league will pan out. I remember a time Celtic beat Rangers 1-0 in the Scottish Cup and a Rangers fan I worked with opined it might be a bad thing in the long run. Unfortunately he was right as the club stumbled along from one crisis to the next. My personal view is the hysteria surrounding last week may be the same, except this time for those who now believe a victory on penalties means Rangers have Celtic where they want them for as long as they want. I have watched many a team raise their game at Hampden against Celtic these past few seasons, then go on to fail in other games they should win. Hibs 3 Rangers 2 and Rangers 1 Alloa 1 only backs up my view. As for the media hysteria last week, it is now being extended to Rangers not being bothered about winning those games. Over 50,000 at Ibrox playing a team already relegated and Rangers were not bothered about winning. Really?
It really annoys me when I see or hear that Celtic only have to turn up to win a league devoid of the Govan shape shifter due to the fact that Celtic have a vastly superior budget,squad,yada yada. I don’t recall that argument being proposed when Rangers (IL)won nine in a row especially since that club was financially bloated with dodgy money.It is also hugely insulting to other clubs. I suspect Sevco are in for a rude awakening next season when they are up against full time squads and not guys who have had to race home from work to line up against them.
paraniodbyexperienceApril 24, 2016 at 07:30
‘..Dear Mr. Bankier Chairman Celtic Football Club,I would like to bring to your attention to the fact I will not be renewing my season ticket after many years.I cannot tell you how much this upsets me and my family..’
_______________
The heartfelt sincerity of your letter, paranoidbyexperience, will find an echo, I’m sure, in the thoughts of many of your fellow supporters.
There have been, of course, in the fairly recent past,biased individuals in senior office in the SFA whose particular misdeeds were , albeit only after initial denial by the Authorities,eventually recognised and acknowledged as such, and those individuals were duly, if reluctantly, dealt with.
However,the issue that for ease of reference is described as ‘Res 12’ goes far beyond the question of institutional bias against one particular club.
If the Scottish FA knowingly and deliberately misled UEFA in favour OF one particular club, this would signal that the fish is rotting from the head, and every part of the body necessarily suffers in consequence.
Whether Celtic or any other individual club suffered immediate financial consequences as a result of ‘RFC -as-was’ being wrongly allowed to participate in UEFA competition on foot of SFA misrepresentation is, in a sense, of less significance than the fact that the SFA was prepared to cheat both UEFA and all of us in Scottish Football to try to save SDM’s cheating club from the effects of his cheating.
If the very governing and law-making/enforcing body of a sporting institution is itself of a cheating cast of mind, what expectation can there be of Sporting Integrity ?
Especially if that body further and idiotically is prepared to sanction the myth that a four-year old sporting entity is entitled to claim even the honest sporting achievement history of a liquidated football club.
Came across this little article on the BBC Wales and thought it might be of interest to SFM readers. Seems some FAs have better licensing standards than others!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-north-west-wales-36119946
Listening to the Celtic Ross County match on Radio Scotland.The first half commentary from Rob MacLean really is quite something regardless of the quality of the football on show.I doubt I have ever heard a commentator so often openly mocking one of the teams playing. Someone at the BBC should listen again.If they agree that this is a balanced commentary of a match I am bewildered. Beginning to wonder if MacLean is auditioning for a gig on Clyde SSB. Based on today’s performance he’s tailor made for Clyde but should be hunted from the BBC.
I’ve been thinking of Allyjambo’s post earlier on and it truly is astonishing that not one journalist on the MSM has opposed the internet bampots face on. Insults and condescension are the norm. (I’m talking about their U turn on RIP Rangers in 2012)
Why don’t they counter the issues one by one – and there are many – and destroy our arguments?
Because they cant.
Don’t know how they can sleep at night.
Is 60K a year worth it?
Sorry but my dander is up. Did it really take the charlatan Charles (Chucky) Green to enlighten the likes of – soon to be knighted, on account of his many awards, (Sir) Keith Jackson – that Rangers did not die?
Really?
Really? Chucky Green?
You should be ashamed.
jimmciApril 24, 2016 at 15:49
”..Someone at the BBC should listen again.If they agree that this is a balanced commentary of a match I am bewildered. .’
_____
And I am bewildered, astonished even, jimmci, that youwould think there is any possibility of BBC Radio Scotland being ‘balanced’ in its football coverage of a single game when it has been so imbalanced for four years in its approach (or non-approach) to the biggest act of sports cheating in football that this country has seen, and week after week and year after sodding year has ,via its’ Sportssound’ presenters and pundits, consistently propagandised the ‘Continuity Rangers’ myth!
On what has been a dreadful day to be an Arab (with official relegation coming next week at our near neighbour’s place) I have been comforting myself that a Judicial Review scheduled for this coming week will bring some much needed (official) light shed on how the SFA operate .
I hope Mr Ashley’s legal team have their eye on the ball because his is otherwise engaged on a possible purchase of a basket of assets from BHS via Duff & Phelps no less (its a small world !) .
Any ideas what he (Ashley) would do with a favourable Judicial Review re DCK ?
JIMMCIAPRIL 24, 2016 at 15:49
=======================
Celtic were poor again today but BBC staff seem to be enjoying it too much considering we all pay for their services. Pretty sad to see Tom English on Twitter having digs at Celtic along with a Rangers supporting blogger. Very unprofessional if you ask me.
A propos of nothing in particular but – just thinking in general about the way things seem to be going….
I know we don’t often associate high quality cerebral processes with footballers – but what if .. just a few, even, some of whom are working towards or already have degrees etc., have been thinking, reflecting and wondering ‘what next’ or just ‘wtf’? ‘any point rocking the boat while I’m paid big bucks for not TOO much effort’, would results be much different from the reality of the last few weeks?
Of course, we would hope that the quality of thought might also be defined by moral values and therein may lie ‘the rub’. Young men require guidance to develop a true sense of justice and moral value, much of which will be learned through example as opposed to ‘preaching’. It seems to me that our clubs, many of which claim to promote social conscience and values, may by their inaction during the last few years have actually diluted any beneficial influence they sought to imbue in their employees.
Which brings me to the contributors on this site.. It is my impression that many of us are beyond the first flush of youth.. Don’t want to attempt anything Shakespearean but to paraphrase Kipling – ‘Let’s keep the heid – the Truth will out!!’
I was listening a little earlier this evening to BBC Radio 4’s weekly ‘obituary’ programme, to hear something more about the superb Victoria Wood, God rest her. As a really funny comedian and song-writer she couldn’t be beaten, not even with a copy of the ‘Woman’s Weekly’!
But also being remembered was the kind of fearless chap we would wish our newspaper sports editors and journalists to be: Raymond Fitzwalter, of the famous “World in Action” investigative Granada TV programme, which really got ripped into the political, business, press and legal worlds of corruption of the day.
This particular little item ( in the Guardian’s obituary http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2016/apr/13/ray-fitzwalter-obituary )
‘
“…In 1969 he was made young journalist of the year in recognition of his investigative reporting. One of his prizewinning stories involved the exposure of a crooked Bradford estate agent who also happened to be his paper’s biggest advertiser”…..
made me think of a wee game of substitution: what would you substitute for ‘Bradford estate agent’ and ‘paper’s biggest advertiser’?
No starter for 10!And no prizes! And heaven forfend that there should be any defamatory substitutions.
cmontheshireApril 24, 2016 at 15:44
“…..because the applicant ‘CPD Tref Caernarfon Town FC Cyf’ was dissolved on 18 August 2015, due to no filing of accounts.’
_______
Geez! What would they have suffered if they had year after year failed to report honestly to the FAW just how much they were paying their players, and that they were operating a dodgy EBT scheme the existence of which had long been known to a former club secretary who had since become President of the FAW?
Good spot, cmontheshire.
And well done, the FAW. There will, I think, be no ‘continuity CPDTref Caernarfon Town FC’ 5-Way agreement!
But at least the guilty club didn’t spout some nonsense about ‘being in negotiations’ with Companies House or ‘in active appeal against Companies House’.
occamApril 24, 2016 at 20:40
______________________________________________________________
Shoite!!!!!!! You’ve just reminded me of my age
John Clark thanks I wrote how I feel…. you wrote what we know …I am not sure it will make any difference ….in the short term.
JEAN7BRODIEAPRIL 24, 2016 at 22:41
Ah Jean … more than skin deep etc …
Not everyone in the country is a Royalist. Despite that, we were recently force fed a tsunami of positive coverage over the Queen’s birthday celebrations. One particular aspect that never ceases to amaze me is when the media line up a bunch of Royal ‘commentators’ who state as a matter of fact that the Royal family are good for the country. No alternative view is allowed, even in this democratic nation of ours. There are a multitude of arguments as to why the Royal family is not, and has not been so good for the nation, but they are not allowed. How similar is that to where we are right now in Scottish football. We have recently been force fed a tsunami of positive coverage over Rangers. A bunch of commentators have lined up to tell us a matter of fact that Rangers are good for Scottish football, and no alternative view is allowed. There are a multitude of arguments as to why Rangers is not, and has not been so good for Scotland, but they are not allowed.
My point is does anyone have any faith that a court is going to spoil the current feel good factor by ruling against the SFA on Thursday?
BIG PINK as a matter of interest what were the numbers on the best day and what are they now ?
While personally not holding out much hope that the ‘fit and proper’ review will bring much in the way of justice, it has made me consider what effect some of the SFA actions/inactions might have had on people outside of Scottish football. While the F&P decision might well have the obvious result of loss of NOMAD and SE listing, an outcome that affects quite a few people with no more interest in RIFC than as an investment in which they sought to make money, there have been other matters that their decisions, lack of decisions, lack of honesty, ignoring of own rules etc. have had a detrimental effect on people outwith the ‘Rangers’ bubble.
The fact that Charles Green was allowed to sell shares in RIFC on the back of an unchallenged ‘same club’ claim must have been extremely misleading and, consequently, quite an inducement to people who might see a ‘new company’ with an established pedigree in a much more attractive light than a more speculative investment in a company involved in a sector notoriously loss making. By not debunking this lie, they, the SFA, allowed a known chancer (by his track record) to lead members of the public and financial institutions to part with their, and others’, money in a bound to fail (as a profit making) venture. All it would have taken to stop Green in his tracks would have been for the SFA to speak the truth. Even if, by some far fetched peice of imaginaton, they were genuinely acting for the benefit of the whole of Scottish football, and not just a new Rangers and their own self interest, this was surely a despicable hiding of the truth from potential investors.
Then we come to what I’ll just describe as the Resolution12 issue. Now that produced a quantifiable ‘loss’ for entities outside of football. For regardless of the SFA’s incompetence, or outright complicity, their inaction in allowing Rangers FC entry into the Champions League led directly into Craig Whyte’s denying of the public purse of some £15m in withheld income tax and NI, by allowing the club an ultimately forlorn attempt to see out the season on CL money. I’m pretty certain that denial of a Euro license would have led directly to administraton for Rangers, with the inevitable liquidation, only weeks into the season. This would, in all probability, have cut down the number of unsuspecting creditors and certainly have prevented the creation of increased debt beyond that already in existence.
I can’t even hazard a guess at Mike Ashley’s intentions should he win his case against the SFA, but hopefully he will take matters further, and, perhaps, by his actons, encourage others to seek redress for, what was for them, quite catastrophic lapses of football, and ultimately financial, governance!
Unlikely though I consider it to be, it might be as a result of actions from outside the football ‘bubble’ that justice might be seen to be done.
A thought that came to me while writing this. We’ve all wondered why it took so long for Doncaster to make his ‘same club’ statement; could it be that he, and the rest at Hampden, didn’t want to commit themselves until after the dust had settled from the IPO, and so escape any stink of complicity in any charges of dishonesty attached to it – not that it was likely that any such charges might be made. Oh wait a minute…
Whilst the following is from the E Tims Celtic site the message is one that applies across the Scottish football spectrum.
The silence and avoidance of responsibility by those responsible for governing our clubs and our game speaks volumes.
So whilst the advice is to contact Celtic, for those who aren’t Celtic fans but accept the message that fair and just governance affects all clubs, then please ask your club if they are aware there is an issue and once they are what is their position on it?
From E Tims http://etims.net/?p=9025
For now, we return to the massive disconnection between the club and the players, the club and the management and most importantly , the club and the support.
We’re becoming more of an irritation of late, which at least means that our current custodians will have to at least pretend to be interested in what we think. Especially as those renewal letters are ready to hit the doormats.
Thats the outside mat, as supporters push them back through the letterbox when they arrive.
We’re well aware now that the board are under the impression that we’ll all be happy again when the new “rangers ” come up the the top division next season, and that alone will make all the problems go away.
Seriously, not since the captain of the Hindenburg told passengers it was fine to smoke has someone underestimated the consequences of a particular action.
The action by the Celtic board in question is the blatant ignorance and shameful procrastination on the Resolution 12 issue.
Celtic have been repeatedly asked to sort it out, and they haven’t..one of those behind the campaign, auldheid, offered a summary on CQN..
Even when provided with clear evidence of skullduggery they have kept their silence.
That silence has allowed the internal war that our enemies occupy to rub their hands with glee.
Faced with a morally bankrupt rival, a morally bankrupt governance and a morally bankrupt media, we have said nothing. That vacumn of silence gave them ground to occupy rather than slink away in shame.
I can take a Celtic who are not playing well. I cannot take a Celtic lacking moral courage.
If we want to recover we need to start a moral fightback and it needs to start now by revealing the full extent of the cheating that has taken place. No more silence on Res12 no more silence on LNS. There is a clear link between both. There is an SFA needin reform. There is no reason for silence any more.
There is a feeling that this is a Celtic -rangers thing. It isn’t. Its far more than that, and affects all clubs, because its about the moral flexibility of those running the game.
I met up with the Res 12 guys on saturday, and listened to evidence and stories that would make you weep in shame for the inaction of our club and the people who run it.
I don’t doubt the integrity and honesty of the men behind the campaign, the work they have put in is humbling, and the obstacles they have had to overcome daunting.
But they are winning, and you’ll hear more about that soon.
On the train home, however, i couldn’t help but wonder why they have to do all of this.
Why aren’t the club doing it ?
If they are aware of shennanigans, and they are, because all the evidence is there, why aren’t they screaming about them from the rooftops ?
Why has it been left to a group of supporters to carry on the battle ?
A battle for fairness and integrity, a battle for the image and viability of the game in Scotland.
Why have they been left to shoulder the burden ?
They’re getting no help at all from the board, and if anything, appear to be blocked at every turn, and offered lame excuses, the most common one concerning the EBT scandal. That is, Celtic will make a move if and when the EBTs are declared illegal.
That shows a remarkable lack of understanding of the issue, which concerns the granting of a licence when there was a significant change in circumstances by the UEFA confirmation date that rendered Rangers participation in the champions League illegal .
The SFA and Rangers didn’t mention it when they should have. Nothing to do with EBTs.
The club are aware of this, several media outlets are aware of this, but no-one seems to want to do anything about it, bar the hardy souls of the Res 12 group.
Why is it down to them to try to sort the problem, when the club should be doing it ?
The club will try to sell season books soon.
Ironically justifying an increase in price because ” the “rangers ” are “back ” . “
We need to know why they won’t support Resolution 12.
We can ask them.
Emails, phone calls, letters wrapped around a house brick, alright, maybe not the latter, but you get the point.
Forget the team for a minute, and concentrate your anger at the club.
If this isn’t sorted now, it will mean that apathy has won. It means that we have colluded with the cheats in the same way the club has.
We’ve missed an opportunity to cleanse the game once, when Turnbull Hutton made us aware of the depths of corruption and nepotism within Hampden.
We cannot afford to let things go back to the way they were.
Ring the club, email the club, and ask them why we should buy a season book if they’re not prepared to fight our corner when the money is being paid into a sport with all the credibility of the wrestling .
A sport which depends on our money, but somehow doesn’t have to be accountable to us.
Resolution 12 cannot be allowed to fail.
They’ve been doing their bit, now you can do yours.
Check E Tims for contact details at Celtic.
Check your own club Web site for corresponding contacts.
INCREDIBLEADAMSPARK APRIL 22, 2016 at 14:18 <sigh> You asked for an example and I delivered two Rangers alumni both at the highest level of paid roles within the SFA at possibly the most critical time when, under correct scrutiny, we could have all been saved from the following debacle and liquidation and all that followed, but, like Oliver Twist, you say “I want more”… My point was made and backed up. Stick a fork in me, I’m done.
BP, I know it might be a bit harder to get somewhere but could the next meeting be on a weekend night ?
Beyond suggesting that Duff and Phelps should have a word with their PR department, I say not a word about
the following sentence, which is lifted straight from para 4 of their puff piece about themselves :
“…As such, the Duff & Phelps Task Force is comprised of professionals with deep expertise in sophisticated financial fraud and compliance issues –
See more at: http://www.duffandphelps.com/about-us/news/news/duff-and-phelps-launches-panama-papers-task-force#sthash.epn0Fbmw.dpuf
jockybhoy April 25, 2016 at 14:40
______________________________________________
I repeat: your claim that ‘in reality everything at Hampden is stacked with Rangers alumni’ is incorrect and your examples prove this. Oliver Twist was quite right in asking for more because what was provided to him was simply not enough.
JOHN CLARKAPRIL 25, 2016 at 15:22
==========================
I think to compare the actual Duff and Phelps to the people who dealt with Rangers administration, who as I understand it were really MCR, who had recently been taken over by Duff and Phelps is probably a bit harsh.
2011 “Insolvency specialist MCR has been bought by New York-based restructuring firm Duff & Phelps for an undisclosed sum, it today emerged.”
“Grier, Clark and Whitehouse,” were all employed by MCR, at least Grier was involved with Whyte in the initial takeover from Murray.
Big PinkApril 25, 2016 at 22:41
This is confusing for me, and others too, maybe. Are you saying that the dishonesty and downright cheating of the last 15 years (all, so far as I can establish, in favour of the perceived interests of just one club) has simply to be forgotten, perhaps in return for some sort of clean-up of the game for the future? How about all the money that I, and many thousands of others, threw away on a rigged game?
Maybe a sort of “peace and reconciliation” process for Scottish football?
Well the first step in that process has to be an acknowledgement from the offending parties that wrongs were committed. From my perspective, at least, Scottish Football is further away from any acknowledgement of wrong-doing than it was 4 years ago. In the case of “Rangers”, not only are they a million miles from acknowledging any fault, they are now pointing the finger at everyone else, as if it was their fault.
The SFA/SPL have put up the shutters- there will never be any admissions of any sort from that direction. That much is crystal clear.
So where is the basis for “moving on”, which is what the SMSM constantly urge us to do? Is it right to move on in such circumstances? Do we all just forget the thousands of pounds extracted from each and every one of us to watch a totally rigged sport, and carry on paying up as though nothing had happened?
Others will make their own decisions, but until the wrongs of the past are fully acknowledged and addressed, then the game will not get a penny more from me. Why should it? And if the game dies, then I’m sorry, but it deserves to. Because absolutely nothing has changed, and if we just ignore the past, then nothing will change. The corrupt model will be seen to have triumphed. And you might as well award “Rangers” 100 titles right now. Why not?
I think the preferred model for the authorities is Northern Ireland of the 50’s, where Belfast Celtic had to walk away, simply out of self-respect, leaving Linfield to mop up the honours for many years. Wouldn’t the SMSM just love a Scottish repeat of that scenario. And that, sadly, is where we are heading, in my opinion
Big Pink………
The site may be currently suffering a slight down turn as you say , but in all honesty there is too much necessity for this site to be preaching the truth rather than not to be here. The alternative is silence . Which would be a victory for the SMSM . I for one will be here for ever , my subscription will be doubled in the next day or two .
For those of us interested , the Twitter account of moo_ted has just published a file showing the league money payouts based on final positions this season for the Premiership .
Hopefully ive attached it !
A few comments on the downturn in numbers on SFM have an air of resignation about them.
The numbers are certainly down, but they are still significant and important, and there is no air of resignation at SFM.
There are a two main factors which explain the downturn;
Rangers successes on the park and low visibility off-field contribute a good deal, but those whose main aim is to witness the delivery of karma to TRFC were never likely to stay the course. The pursuit of sporting integrity is too often conflated with bringing RFC to justice. It is in fact much wider than that. The Rangers problem is a symptom- not the disease itself.
There are some who are suffering from the fatigue and battle-weariness that many of you have observed – but I am sure those guys will get their energies back soon enough.
Those who have stuck with it for this amount of time are committed to changing the game for the better, and I can’t see them falling off right now.
Getting our central message across, that of the corrupt nature of the game’s administration, is much easier to achieve when the motives of those spreading that message are not in question.
I can’t deny that financially, we have taken a huge hit with subs being cancelled, but we will cut our cloth to fit.
The radio station is still a reality – although proving to be more logistically problematic than we had anticipated.
Nobody suggested at any time that this would be easy. It is not. We have our good months and not so good months, but nobody at SFM is discouraged. We are still filled with hope about the future of the game.
SFM is not going anywhere soon. We will continue to provide fans with a platform whereby MSM mythology can be debunked, and where intelligent and below the surface analyses can be carried out.
And it will all be done with a smile, and a welcome for fans of all clubs who like all of us truly see the sport’s survival as the main prerequisite for their own partisan needs.
Tris is planning a members’ meeting to be held in a in a few weeks. Our future, which is a very tangible and optimistic one, will be up for discussion then.
Some time ago, a poster rejoicing in the moniker Jimmci informed the blog that he had been fortunate enough to be granted an audience with Mr. Peter Lawwell to discuss Resolution 12.
I am an avid reader of this blog and do not recollect if Jimmci posted the denouement of his discussions.
I remember being somewhat surprised why Mr. Lawwell had selected one fan out of the many who have written Celtic Park on the Resolution 12 issue (including yours truly). I did receive the courtesy of a phone call from the PR office, but that unfortunately did not include the views of the Chief Executive.
Has anyone heard from Jimmci? Apologies if I somehow missed it.
Neepheid
Obviously something lost in translation Neeps. I wasn’t saying anything of the kind.
The backdrop to next season is being erected as we speak.
Celtic looking for a new manager after a disappointing campaign (despite being a near certainty to win the title),
Aberdeen pressing the reset button for a fresh challenge after the disappointment of their failure to capitalise on Celtic’s weaknesses after early promise,
Dundee United facing relegation and a hard slog out of the Championship – and possibly parting company with their manager,
Hearts taking stock after a successful return to the top league and believing that they can realistically challenge for the title next year,
Ross County looking to build on a maiden cup win,
Motherwell hoping to take their late season form into the new campaign,
Killie readying themselves for a playoff showdown with possibly Hibs or Falkirk,
Hamilton living to fight another day,
Rangers on a high with their Championship win and morale boosting success against Celtic,
Hibs praying for that long sought after cup win.
Wouldn’t it be nice to know that all of that could take place in an atmosphere of trust, and the confidence that those people who have sought to destroy the game from within have been jettisoned?
Every day those rotten apples remain in place, the validity of the challenges above is diminished a little more.
Football is still capable of exciting us and motivating us as we all cling to the hope that our respective teams will bring us the hope of success. The last few years, when honours have been shared more than at any other time in the history of the modern game, have confirmed that.
To see the same old discredited, do-nothing brigade still clinging to power, brings an ever more hollow ring to that hope.
Perhaps the upcoming JR cases will force a clearout of the current regimes, but they will only be replaced by more of the same.
The root and branch replacement of the individuals, accountability structures, rules and culture in football is still necessary. And it far more important to me than the success of individual teams over the next few seasons.
People in the MSM have said to me, “It’s all too complicated. Too hard to explain to our readers. Where’s the soundbite we can sell these theories of yours with?
John Clark:
Stewart Regan:
There’s your soundbite MSM guys.
New initiative here in terms of our content aggregation plan. We will provide free hosting for club-specific satellite sites/blogs for club-specific discussion, in keeping with the SFM ethos.
We can also supply (free!) help with design and site build.
Want to start your own blog/infosite with something like;
aberdeen.sfm.scot
rangers.sfm.scot ?
The radio content plan is also taking shape. We are looking for club-specific podcasts for broadcast to a wider, non partisan audience.
Please let us know and we will chat about details. sfm@sfm.scot
In the press we are full steam for the return (sic) of Rangers (sic) to Europe. Details such as the score at the cup final to be arranged.
My memory of discussion on this site suggests this is far from automatic. Expectations are being allowed / encouraged in a way that may cause the imposition of rules very difficult. If it is not automatic should supporters not be told now…?
Could the relevant comments on the site not be assembled at the front of the site. If the route to Europe is unclear, it is time this was acknowledged by the paid officers of the game.
(This is part of my general concern that the ‘entry costs’ of following this are too high …)
ALEXANDER276
I think Auldheid is our resident rules expert here 🙂
I agree that there may be a lack of clarity, but from memory, I think TRFC can play in Europe next season if they qualify (by dint of their 4 year membership of the local association).
Auldheid?
BIG PINKAPRIL 26, 2016 at 10:46
IF (big if) Gers win the Cup……
…what will be on interest (to folk like myself who enjoy wasting time on such trivia!) will be the fate of the 2.05 points earned by Rangers in Season 2011-12, just within the 5-season span which comprises the ranking points total.
The national (base-line) coefficient for that season was 0.55 points.
Will they use the 2.05 points in contributing towards Gers’ total, by which UEFA will seed them? [Same club folk cheer]
Or will they use the default, baseline 0.55 points figure [New club folk cheer].
Cat stalking pigeons as we speak 😉
Big PinkApril 26, 2016 at 10:46
ALEXANDER276
I think Auldheid is our resident rules expert here
I agree that there may be a lack of clarity, but from memory, I think TRFC can play in Europe next season if they qualify (by dint of their 4 year membership of the local association).
Auldheid?
____________________________
And by dint of the fact they have no outstanding social taxes, which would not be the case if Rangers FC still existed and qualified for European competition!
Taking that a step further, and adding the Resolution 12 issue, we know that RFC (the ‘Club’) shouldn’t have been granted the necessary license if they had, indeed, outstanding social taxes as at the final cut-off date (whether you consider the club separate from the company, or not).
Now, not only do those outstanding taxes remain outstanding, they have been added to immensely! So, under the same criteria that meant RFC should not have qualified for Europe in 2011, that same club (if it still exists under whatever guise) cannot be granted a license to play in European competition as the exact same social taxes (plus much more) remain outstanding, and even the SFA know that this time round.
Basically, there is no way, assuming the UEFA rules are adhered to, that Rangers FC, founded in 1872, can possibly play in a UEFA competition until the outstanding taxes of 2012 are either paid in full or an accommodation with HMRC is reached (such as a CVA).
This has very little to do with the OC/NC debate, it is a simple fact that, if a football club is barred from Europe because of unpaid taxes, it will remain so until those taxes are paid to the satisfaction of the relevant tax authority, regardless of whether or not the club is separate from the company! Otherwise the rule would be completely unenforceable. Could this be the problem King foresaw that led him to the idea of buying (can’t remember the correct legal term) RFC out of liquidation?
Unless I am completely wrong in what I’ve written (I may not have put up an irrevocable argument, and if so, I’d be interested in reading one that proves me wrong) then any club playing in Europe, before RFC’s outstanding taxes have been settled, cannot possibly be Rangers FC, 1872!
Of course, that doesn’t mean the Scottish football authorities, and the SMSM, won’t ignore the matter and carry on as though everyone is a stupid as they’d like us to be.
Not quite appropriate to TSFM as such but certainly to football.
What a shocking indictment of the Police this morning as the Hillsborough verdicts were announced.
The Police, Government at the time, and the Sun in particular should all hang their heads in shame today.
makes recent shenanigans by our Foitball authorities seem almost petty by comparison.
Allyjambo
April 26, 2016 at 11:49
—————————–
Although you say it’s not really a ‘same club’ thing, I think you raise a great point that can be used to prove that it is indeed a new club (if, that is, ‘Rangers’ win the final and qualify for Europe).
As far as I know, it’s the CLUB with outstanding social taxes that is banned from playing, not the Company. It seems to me, then, that the only way they will be allowed to play in Europe is if they are confirmed as a new club. I presume that UEFA, if contacted at the appropriate time would officially confirm that?
Allyjambo,
You are completely wrong.
Issuing of UEFA licences is an annual process. They last no more than a year, then the process begins again. The same licence is not carried over, a new one is issued every season.
Therefore (if Gers win the Cup) the licence applicant – The Rangers Football Club Ltd, the “legal entity responsible for the football team” etc – will be judged on it’s existing financial figures at the time of the application.
The idea that any financial matters relating to RFC 2012 plc (or TRFC PLC as it was named when it previously was a licence applicant) will have any effect on the application is just absurd.
For anyone harbouring any hopes that UEFA may, potentially, shine a beacon of light by promoting Rangers as a “new club”, await disappointment. A brief check of – among other examples – Derry City FC will see that a change of identity in the legal entity “licence applicant” is certainly no obstacle to UEFA presenting the club’s history and identity as continuous… http://www.uefa.com/teamsandplayers/teams/club=50086/profile/history/index.html
Indeed, as i mentioned in another post, UEFA in fact seeded newco Derry City using points won in competition by liquidated-oldco Derry City. Gers’ season 2011-12 won points will be counted above and beyond the baseline, national coefficient if the same process is to be followed.
It’s interesting that the SFA are keeping quiet on the issue of TRFC playing in Europe. After all there is plenty of mention on the possibility in the media and the internet. Surely it would be a kindness for Regan to come out and say ‘don’t get your hopes up’ if he foresaw a problem with qualification. Or maybe he is hoping against hope that Hibs prevail in the final and that he doesn’t need to deal with a tricky situation.
One thing’s for sure, if TRFC win the final it will bring the OC/NC debate sharply into focus.
nawliteApril 26, 2016 at 12:07
I am, of course, fully aware that, if my assertions are correct, it has a major impact on the OC/NC debate, but I was trying to come at it from a different angle, and say that any club that qualifies for Europe cannot be a club that has outstanding taxes. I am certain the UEFA rules will not talk of company and club separately, and so it will definitely say that a club with outstanding taxes doesn’t qualify for European competitions. There can be no doubt that Rangers FC, 1872, still has outstanding taxes – HMRC is still chasing those taxes. However, I am also trying to say that, regardless of the OC/NC debate, if RFC still exists (in the form of TRFC) then it cannot play in European competition, as it would still owe these outstanding taxes!
Let’s, for the hell of it, assume UEFA accepts the ‘club different from company’ notion:-
If the ludicrous idea that club and company are separate was accepted by UEFA, then the rules covering outstanding taxes (and debts) would be unworkable/unenforceable, for clubs with outstanding taxes at the relevant dates would just transfer to a new company (shortly before the date), and either pay off the taxes, if they can, at a later date via the ‘old’ company, or just allow that company to be liquidated. In other words, it would just become a farce! So, even in that scenario (separate club and company) UEFA would have to insist that the club carries the responsibility for it’s social taxes, whatever company owns/runs it.
Back to reality:-
It becomes a Catch 22 scenario: if TRFC want to continue to claim they are RFC, 1872, then they can’t play in Europe; if they want to play in Europe, they just can’t be RFC!
But you are correct, it amounts to the same thing, and probably ends the debate, unless the fix continues all the way to the top of UEFA (which is, sadly, all too possible).
I see we are back to hoping that some situation is going to force to happen what we want to happen. We really should know by now that it will only if we take the issue into our own hands and act that there will be change.
This time it is the qualification for Europe that will show the whole issue up. No it won’t.
Rangers HAD an overdue tax bill but at the point of being placed for liquidation that was handed with the company side of things to BDO. It does not matter what side of the OC/NC debate you stand. The Tax bill is with BDO. The club playing out of Ibrox is free of it.
ME? I believe the law of the land therefore it is a new club. There are many other ways of proving it but whether they are allowed a euro place is not one of them. Morally it is wrong but legally and by the laws of the game it’s OK.
Nope, we need to get our hands dirty if we wish to cleanse the whole issue from our sport and that won’t be done by targeting the Ibrox club. It is the SFA and the SPFL that needs to be the object of our actions.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B_X7aVh2s6qcQTA5X0t5b1lwQ0U
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B_X7aVh2s6qcS1hhamJ0czlkdVU
https://www.change.org/p/scottish-football-association-return-integrity-to-football-administration-in-scotland-94421b40-2d6b-4d4b-9cff-912c9849478f
JIMMCI @ 11:49
Jimmci, did you manage to meet Peter Lawwell? If so, can you inform us if you learned anything pertinent vis-a-vis Resolution 12?
Thank you.
AllyjamboApril 26, 2016 at 12:52
nawliteApril 26, 2016 at 12:07
I am, of course, fully aware that, if my assertions are correct, it has a major impact on the OC/NC debate, but I was trying to come at it from a different angle, and say that any club that qualifies for Europe cannot be a club that has outstanding taxes. I am certain the UEFA rules will not talk of company and club separately, and so it will definitely say that a club with outstanding taxes doesn’t qualify for European competitions.
====================
Your overall premise is correct
” It becomes a Catch 22 scenario: if TRFC want to continue to claim they are RFC, 1872, then they can’t play in Europe; if they want to play in Europe, they just can’t be RFC!”
but the detail obscures it to a degree.
UEFA do allow for both a club only or club and company construct. Its covered in this piece from CQN magazine http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/uefa-rules-and-the-scottish-cup-finalists/ which also covers the process of obtaining a licence by special permission.
However it is the end item that covers the detail of UEFA’s position. To accept RFC as the same club as TRFC or (as the article suggests an application from TRIFC ) UEFA would have to remove Article 12, which is there for the express purpose of protecting the integrity of UEFA competition! It cannot be done.
So to UEFA the applicant whether that be TRFC as the club or TRIFC as the company is not RFC. I’ve been making this point in relation to Article 12 since the same club nonsense was given air space and what we should be asking of SFA/UEFA is four questions.
1. Are TRFC applying for a UEFA Licence for season 2016/17??
2. Are TRIFC applying for a UEFA licence for 2016/17?
3. Did RFC apply in 2011 and preceding years for a UEFA licence (knowing they were told not to bother in 2012)?
4. Did Murray International Holdings apply for a licence in 2011 and preceding years?
Answering those four questions would put the record straight in terms of how UEFA see an application from the club/company responsible for football at Ibrox, but I wouldn’t bet on either them being asked by the main stream media or getting a reply.
Anyhoo here are UEFA rules:
Article 45 – Written contract with a football company
1 If the licence applicant is a football company as defined in Article 12(1)(b)
[ Article 12 – Definition of licence applicant and three-year rule]
1. A licence applicant may only be a football club, i.e. a legal entity fully responsible for a football team participating in national and international competitions which
either:
a) is a registered member of a UEFA member association and/or its affiliated league (hereinafter: registered member); or
b) has a contractual relationship with a registered member (hereinafter: football company). ]
(If 1b)
it must provide a written contract of assignment with a registered member.
2. The contract must stipulate the following, as a minimum:
a) The football company must comply with the applicable statutes, regulations, directives and decisions of FIFA, UEFA, the UEFA member association and its affiliated league.
b) The football company must not further assign its right to participate in a competition at national or international level.
c) The right of this football company to participate in such a competition ceases to apply if the assigning club’s membership of the association ceases.
d) If the football company is put into bankruptcy or enters liquidation, this is deemed to be an interruption of membership or contractual relationship within the meaning of Article 12. For the sake of clarity, should the licence have already been granted to the football company, then it cannot be transferred from the football company to the registered member.
e) The UEFA member association must be reserved the right to approve the name under which the football company participates in the national competitions.
f) The football company must, at the request of the competent national arbitration tribunal or CAS, provide views, information, and documents on matters regarding the football company’s participation in the national and/or international competition.
3 The contract of assignment and any amendment to it must be approved by the UEFA member association and/or its affiliated league.
Earlier UEFA rules from 2005 also made the distinction between 1a and 1b in the same terms, which does beg the question who was the licence applicant from Ibrox in the past? Rangers FC the registered member of the SFA or Murray International Holdings (MIH) on the basis they had a contractual relationship with Rangers Football Club and a written contract of assignment? if they didn’t then who in heaven was the holding company before 2012?
In an archive somewhere in the dungeons of Hampden or Nyon that evidence lies.
Bryce9A has apparently tried to respond to my earlier post but is unable to get past moderation. I’ve tried to copy what he wrote over from twitter, but due to my poor twitter skills, I’ve been unable to do so. I welcome his response as it gives the opportunity for further discussion and examination of the point raised.
He claims that I am completely wrong and gives his reasoning as UEFA licenses only last one year and that the license is not carried over with a new one issued each season. He does, of course, ignore the fact that Rangers Football Club’s taxes are still very much outstanding, and that any fresh application would, in any proper process, take that into consideration. Had RFC somehow not gone into liquidation in 2012, but the outstanding taxes still remained, then they would not have been granted a license for season 2012-2013. Or 2013-2014 and so on until the taxes were settled.
I’d like to point out that the longer taxes go unpaid, the greater the offence becomes, not the other way around!
Of course, it is Rangers we are discussing, and perhaps he thinks the Bryson ruling will take effect here, and UEFA will say, ‘we didn’t notice it (it was hidden from us) at the time, so it’s all ok then’!
He also tries to introduce the ‘club separate from the company idea’, without actually saying it, by suggesting it would be wrong to attach the liabilities of RFC to those of TRFC. As I, perhaps clumsily, tried to say in my second post on the subject; even if UEFA did accept this ‘separation’ then their rules regarding outstanding social taxes (and so all debt) would become unenforceable because clubs could get round them by changing ‘vehicles’ whenever required, even when liquidation was not an issue. The only way to ensure this couldn’t happen would be to ensure the responsibility for taxes (and all debts) was firmly attached to the ‘club’. UEFA, of course, don’t have to make this clear within their rules as they do not consider the club and company to be separate entities.
I, at no time, suggested that TRFC will be denied entry to European competition due to RFC’s outstanding taxes, I only put forward that no club with outstanding taxes can play in Europe, and Rangers FC’s taxes still remain outstanding, so no club that plays in Europe can be Rangers FC, 1872.
INCREDIBLEADAMSPARK: you say my claim that ‘in reality everything at Hampden is stacked with Rangers alumni’ is incorrect and your examples prove this.
If 2 out of the top 4 paid positions being held by Rangers Alumni at one time: 50% of positions from members of a team which is only 2.4% of the teams represented in the National Leagues (1/42) isn’t stacked, I don’t know what is. What was it that Oliver Twist got when he asked for more…?
Not sure we should be getting carried away with regard to T’Rangers getting into Europe.
There is still a game of football to be played and in a cup tie anything can happen.
That being said should T’Rangers win on the 21 May and qualify for Europe as cup winners then the questions with regard to the continuity myth and the issues of historical social taxes must surely raise its head again.
However I would not put it past the domestic powers that be to try and sweep the whole issue under the carpet. Similarly I have no particular faith in Uefa becoming involved to try and resolve any issues. If someone is going to do something then pressure must be put on their Club Financial Control Body.
The thing that gets me is that football is all about business these days. What team wouldn’t like a deserved crack at Europe and see where it takes them.
I understand that if the winners of the cup had already qualified for the CL the cup runners-up don’t get the place and that would go to the fourth placed Premiership Team.
However I am not sure if there is ruling for who gets the Euro slot if the cup winner is banned/unable to play in Europe.
Does it therefore not seem right from a business point of view that, if required, Hibs (not in the best financial position) as beaten finalists should be the ones to seek clarification on the position with regard to a club which has been described, by a head honcho of the Scottish game, as the same one that still has social taxes outstanding.
Similarly should the fourth placed Premiership Team not also be seeking clarity on the matter. I am sure any of the candidates, Motherwell (Fan owned), St Johnstone (whose ‘celeb fan’ Mr Cosgrove makes a big thing about paying social taxes) and Ross County (always the Euro bridesmaid) would surely all love a wee Euro trip.
That adds four potential clubs to show it isn’t just a T’Rangers/Celtic thing.
I admit I started that European hare running. That little debate was an education. Much appreciated (unfortunately I am not a Scottish sports journalist.)
I am not and never have been Jimmci.
I did write to Peter Lawwell as shareholder and express my concerns about tax evasion and its impact on Celtic’s best interests and was invited to meet with him. I was told in the meeting with Peter Lawwell and John Paul Taylor that several meetings had been arranged with fans either season ticket holders and/or shareholders.
They stated they had been surprised when the diddy clubs refused to accept new “Rangers” into the league and surprised at Nimmo Smith too. They said that they were focused on Celtic’s best interests. They stated that there were no SFA plans to deal with Rangers in terms of tax evasion. Regan would be held accountable through SFA Management Board in terms of Celtic’s best interests. They did not fully agree that work was needing to be done in terms of leadership and governance of Scottish football. They did not accept that Celtic were facing a rigged game or that ten years of cheating needed to be dealt with (not withstanding the final position from the courts).
wottpiApril 26, 2016 at 15:15
I’m not sure there is any question over TRFC’s eligibility to play in Europe, unless the ‘going concern’ qualification might be a problem, in which case I’m sure the SFA will find a way around it, with ease, and make it go away.
There is, however, one other small problem with the idea that the club losing out on Europe might want to challenge TRFC’s eligibility, and that is, in recent years, clubs not progressing past the qualifying rounds have generally found it to be a loss making exercise, and so, with money tight at all clubs, might find it inadvisable to make a noise, and create enemies, in a situation where they are just as likely to lose money as they are to gain anything other than our admiration and a lot of problems!
We’ve all seen how reluctant the clubs have been to make a stand against the injustice that’s been prevalent in our game, for a number of years, and I doubt anyone is going to stand up to make a noise, especially in a potential loss making scenario, when backing from anyone else is, at best, unlikely.
Another problem is, that, as everyone involved with our clubs seem to rely on the likes of Keith Jackson to keep them appraised of what’s going on in the game, there is every possibility that no one in the boardroom of any club has the slightest idea that there may be a problem with TRFC’s eligibility, or that the SFA are not to be trusted to police that club’s applications for European football – or anything else.
ALLYJAMBOAPRIL 26, 2016 at 14:35
Bryce9A has apparently tried to respond to my earlier post but is unable to get past moderation. I’ve tried to copy what he wrote over from twitter, but due to my poor twitter skills, I’ve been unable to do so. I welcome his response as it gives the opportunity for further discussion and examination of the point raised.
He claims that I am completely wrong and gives his reasoning as UEFA licenses only last one year and that the license is not carried over with a new one issued each season. He does, of course, ignore the fact that Rangers Football Club’s taxes are still very much outstanding, and that any fresh application would, in any proper process, take that into consideration. Had RFC somehow not gone into liquidation in 2012, but the outstanding taxes still remained, then they would not have been granted a license for season 2012-2013. Or 2013-2014 and so on until the taxes were settled.
I’d like to point out that the longer taxes go unpaid, the greater the offence becomes, not the other way around!
Of course, it is Rangers we are discussing, and perhaps he thinks the Bryson ruling will take effect here, and UEFA will say, ‘we didn’t notice it (it was hidden from us) at the time, so it’s all ok then’!
He also tries to introduce the ‘club separate from the company idea’, without actually saying it, by suggesting it would be wrong to attach the liabilities of RFC to those of TRFC. As I, perhaps clumsily, tried to say in my second post on the subject; even if UEFA did accept this ‘separation’ then their rules regarding outstanding social taxes (and so all debt) would become unenforceable because clubs could get round them by changing ‘vehicles’ whenever required, even when liquidation was not an issue. The only way to ensure this couldn’t happen would be to ensure the responsibility for taxes (and all debts) was firmly attached to the ‘club’. UEFA, of course, don’t have to make this clear within their rules as they do not consider the club and company to be separate entities.
I, at no time, suggested that TRFC will be denied entry to European competition due to RFC’s outstanding taxes, I only put forward that no club with outstanding taxes can play in Europe, and Rangers FC’s taxes still remain outstanding, so no club that plays in Europe can be Rangers FC, 1872.
………………………………………..
Very well written and and point made, the crux of the (upcoming) matter ?!
NAWLITEAPRIL 26, 2016 at 12:07
AllyjamboApril 26, 2016 at 11:49—————————–
Although you say it’s not really a ‘same club’ thing, I think you raise a great point that can be used to prove that it is indeed a new club
———————————————————————————————————————–
Nawlite. I think the old club being liquidated proved they were a new club. Billy Nimmo and the SPL even argued over the dates they ceased to be a club.
Have been reading but not posted for a long time. I see even the Clumpany saw the need to come out of retirement and highlight the result of the Hillsborough verdict – justice for the 96 indeed. I am sure many of us can remember where we were that sad day.
I have seen the concerns about a drop in numbers on SFM and I think it is fair to say that with no court cases of late it has got a bit dull. Celtic have been extremely poor, Rangers have scraped past the joiners and plumbers to join the Premiership and at least Fife is represented in winning two titles this season! We have a strong Dunfermline and East Fife.
But the Hampden bunker remains filled with the same people hiding away from reality – it has taken the families of the 96 a total of 27 (twenty seven) years to get justice from the cover up of lies and self preservation of those in power. One can only hope that we do not have to wait that long for Scottish Football to rid itself of the curse of p*ss poor administrators. The clubs have to share some of the burden because they put them in place but sooner or later even the likes of Celtic find that their fans are walking away in numbers and their owner suddenly wants to know why?
I suppose it should not be a shock to anyone that the owner only notices if the cash starts reducing and wants to know why. I suspect many owners in the game today might just get a tad worried that what is happening to Celtic might just happen to them to if they keep their heads in the sand and hope it all goes away. As JC would say “hell mend em”.
I hope club owners are watching the Celtic situation and start waking up and smell the coffee because fans have had enough. There was no armageddon and whilst the cups have been shared around, some attendances risen, and most clubs on an even financial keel, one hopes they do not return to trying to bankrupt themselves because a new team has got to the Premiership. The clubs and SPFL/SFA should realize that nobody is going to stick around forever and watch a fraudulent game.
Here’s hoping for a stronger Arbroath and even stronger East Fife next season.
jockybhoy April 26, 2016 at 14:57
______________________________________________
So just to be clear: You’re no longer claiming it’s everything now, just four jobs, and years ago? I think everyone has questions about Ogilvie and Smith and it was not the issue I had and it was not the point you were trying to make in your original post.
Oliver Twist got a ladle over the head or a sing song, depending on whether you read the book or watch the film. Either way, just like me, he never did get what he asked for. We have to keep asking questions so we can tell the difference between fiction and reality.
According to this evening’s Dundee Evening Telegraph , Stephen Thompson in “early talks” with a view to selling DUFC – watch that space .
NAEGREETINAPRIL 26, 2016 at 17:34
According to this evening’s Dundee Evening Telegraph , Stephen Thompson in “early talks” with a view to selling DUFC – watch that space .
====================
Any idea who the potential purchaser may be?
UPTHEHOOPS April 26 @ 18.22 – various rumours , nothing concrete , from overseas &/or UK – some Utd fans would be glad to see the back of Thompson who , overall , has done a decent job I think bar a couple of misjudgements – careful what you wish for seems apt at the moment .
ALLYJAMBOAPRIL 26, 2016 at 16:08
If European Football is a loss making exercise then surely that is the last place a team with accumulated loses of £31m over fours years would want to be? However they and the supporters in the MSM seems to be saying’ bring it on’.
Lets face it, fans of all clubs want to see their teams have a wee crack at Europe, regardless of the cost.
If the boards of those same teams have issues with competing in Europe then they need to find other occupations.
Given the timing of the early rounds the cost should be no more than the dull friendlies that are often undertaken year in year out.
RMCGEDDAWN @ 15:54
Thank you for that summary. Taken together with my conversation with John Paul Taylor, and the salient element of today’s PMG blog, I have to conclude that, from the Board’s point of view, Resolution 12 is dead.
To me, this would be a tragedy, and a huge gamble by the Board. I hope that the redoubtable Auldheid and his associates have another arrow in their collective quivers.
If, for the sake of argument, some Celtic shareholders take the SFA to court, a la a Tyneside billionaire, Celtic will still have to contend with a boycott by previous season ticket holders.
I am still astounded of forehead at how out of touch the Board are, how much they have alienated the support, and how badly they have mismanaged the last 4 years.
wottpiApril 26, 2016 at 20:40
I think Motherwell in particular reported a loss in their last European sojourn (and they are not the only club to do so), with receipts from the home crowd not covering the expenses of putting the match on and the travel and hotel costs for the away leg. I don’t think there’s much chance of TV revenue either. The potential to draw a trans Siberian club looms large in the Euro qualifiers.
Now, every club, I’m sure, will want to play in Europe, and see it as an achievement, and perhaps an inducement for new signings, but I doubt the clubs likely to benefit from TRFC not being allowed entry would consider the potential ‘rewards’ worthy of the effort. The club with the incredible losses could well achieve a home crowd that would ensure a healthy profit, and their hubris, I’m sure, will tell them they will go quite far, so their desire to gain entry into European competition is well founded. They also have the need to show/maintain the veneer that they are a ‘big club’, with European credentials!
I’m sure any club that might benefit from a UEFA ruling that TRFC are not eligible will be glad to take their place (I don’t think Hibs would qualify unless they win the cup), but that is different from actually initiating an investigation into TRFC’s eligibility, as they would be seen as ‘innocent beneficiaries’ of UEFA bureaucracy as opposed to the instigators of a plot against a rival club.
The bottom line is that I doubt any club would be prepared to rock the TRFC boat for a crack at the meagre rewards on offer.
yesterday I emailed Celtic:
“Before I consider renewing my season ticket I need the Celtic Board to answer this question, “Why did you not pursue the Resolution 12 subject with UEFA?
Today JP Taylor, Supporter LiaisonOfficer replied:
Thank you for your email, as a rule the Club has a policy not to comment on Internet speculation, however this sustained campaign against the Club, which has no foundation. The Club has for some time been addressing the issues raised by Resolution 12 and supporters can be assured it will continue to do so in the best interests of the Club.
Best regards”
is this the stock answer concerned fans will receive if they dare to raise the subject with the Celtic Board? I certainly won’t be parting with my hard-earned until I am satisfied those gentlemen are acting in my interests.
I received an answer from CFC to my earlier e mail regarding Resolution 12. The message I was given was that the club had done everything they could on the issue of Resolution 12 and that supporters should be assured that they would continue to do so. I hae ma’ doubts! Why oh why won’t they come out and give us some clarification on this?
BILLY BOYCE
this sustained campaign against the Club, which has no foundation.??
are celtic playing victim here?
TONY:the victim card works very effectively down Govan way. In this case the ‘them and us” appears to be the Celtic Board v its own fans. Taylor’s reply could perhaps be set out better (I have reproduced it as it is written). It lacks any information that would explain the Board’s action / inaction on Resolution 12. I realise that Taylor is merely the messenger, but the Celtic directors will soon have to address this issue in the face of so many fans seeking answers.
INIQUITOUSIVAPRIL 26, 2016 at 13:58,
Hi, I will be seeing PL tomorrow. Vacation has caused a delay but I will post a short summary of outcome when I can.
One message from me is three season cards will not be renewed next season unless there is a change vis a vis the approach to the SFA in the immediate future. My local CSC ran 3 buses on Sunday. In the recent past we would have had 8. Next season I suspect that 3 could become the norm such is the widespread disaffection amongst our members. I don’t think the Club are listening and will fool themselves that this is the Ronny effect.( The guy they appointed.)
We will not even be walk-ups on the day next season. Without change we’ll walk away completely. I have not attended one CFC game in the past six months. Nor have my sons. Nothing to do with Deila; – albeit the footy seems awful but due entirely to the politics being played out by the custodians of the club. The AGM finished me with the current CFC Board.
We will no doubt remain as attendees this season in the officially published attendance figures but our seats are empty. No more after this season though, without significant change. We’re out.
JIMMCI, Good Luck. From reading this blog, we can all probably forecast what answers you will receive. I conveyed basically the same message as you did, and was politely palmed off (by telephone) with a series of non answers.
i think they are underestimating the degree of support for Resolution 12, and obviously hoped for a ‘feel good’ factor from the Cup semi final. Well, we all know what happened there.
i hope you fare better and elicit a more substantial and cogent response than I did!
BILLY BOYCE
they might have problems if phil is to be believed
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/revisionism-and-rammed-renewals/
AllyjamboApril 26, 2016 at 16:08
‘… there is every possibility that no one in the boardroom of any club has the slightest idea that there may be a problem with TRFC’s eligibility, or that the SFA are not to be trusted to police that club’s applications for European football – or anything else.’
_________________
I doubt if the word ‘trust’ is one that most clubs would ever figure as forming the basis of their relationships with each other or with their SFA Board!
Those clubs who have experienced financial difficulty must have spat blood when they learned of SDM’s (personally unpunished)cheating.
And they must be raging at not being as smart as Whyte in liquidating, asset stripping, dumping the millions of debt, setting up a variously named new club and getting the SFA to create and support the myth that the new club is the old Rangers!
I’m pretty sure most of them would have used some very un-Parliamentary language when they saw what a wizard wheeze that was for the fly men. If SDM was ‘duped’, our club owners and directors have been made to look like right patsies.
But they put up with it.
They know they have been had, but for some reason other than ‘trust’ they have been afraid to call the whole thing out for the deceitful nonsense it is.
Bad cess to them.