Launch of SFSA Fans’ Survey


EasyJamboJuly 30, 2017 at 19:04 (Edit) Good man. What is becoming clear …

Comment on Launch of SFSA Fans’ Survey by Auldheid.

easyJamboJuly 30, 2017 at 19:04 (Edit)
Good man.
What is becoming clear from a response from McKenzie elsewhere that the questioner will no doubt run with to a wider audience,  is that dishonesty was excluded from the LNS Terms of Reference.
SFA Articles 5.1 a,  and f in particular, referring to good faith  were avoided simply by putting the Commission in the SPL’s hands. Lucky that eh?
Whilst concentrating on what took place between Andrew Dickson and Ian McMillan  the same significance of Odam”s testimony was not recognised absorbed as you have drawn to attention.
It all adds to the idea that whatever happened dishonesty (aka cheating) was not going to be addressed by LNS and Rod McKenzie who drew up the ToRs also took Mr Dickson’s written testimony for the LNS Commission.
Note written: that ruled out any more questioning on the discussions that the LNS Report says took place between Dickson and McMillan.
What Dickson said at the FTT was he had no knowledge at all that HMRC had asked McMillan about the DOS ebts.
Note that McMillan in his reply to HMRC says he looked in players personal files at Rangers.
So did he do it at all? Did he do it when Dickson was asleep at the wheel or tell Dickson why or tell a porkie in terms of why he was looking at personnel files.
If Dickson had any inkling that HMRC were involved and that the McMillan reply was untrue, whilst Dickson himself was sitting with personal files for 14 players still at Rangers with side letters and another 12 who had side letters but had left by April 2005, exactly how credible is the idea that Dickson or McMillan thought there was no need to tell the SFA on the grounds they stated, or at the very least ask the SFA if the use of EBTS infringed registration rules?
LNS did not probe that point because it wasn’t in his brief but that did not stop him saying there was no question of honesty, (just as his thoughts on the immortality of RFC were not part of it either).
That argument put forward that ebts were not paid to players so the SFA need not know about them or the side letters depends totally on the credibility of both McMillan and Dickson and the FTT described McMillan as an incredible witness and Dickson was treated by scepticism by FTT lawyers acting for HMRC.
The SC Decision, applying Brysonthink or separately, can now be given the construction the SC court did not believe in the honesty of both parties either. Funny how LNS did not go there but accepted Rangers word.
When SFM wrote to Harper Mcleod in 2014 it was on the basis that they might have been duped by Duff and Phelps, that does not mean the idea that they might be in on the fix did not cross minds, and now we know thanks to RTC that a meeting took place between Rod McKenzie and Gary Withey in October 2011 to discuss the implications of an upcoming insolvency  it looks as if the suspicion was not too far from the truth.

Its pretty clear why lawyers back the case for not investigating.

Auldheid Also Commented

Launch of SFSA Fans’ Survey
John Clark

” And add housebuilders to the list of cheapskate minimalist contributors .”
I have coined a term for the maximalist of contributors whom I affectionaly think of as lads in deference to them no longer being so by age but not in spirit.

The Lads of The Summer Whine. 06

(If ye canny laff at yersel by oor ages, ye might as well be deid.)06

Launch of SFSA Fans’ Survey
On the question of justifying a JR this conversation from CQN might be of interest

Original Point from
Dexter P. Bampot on 2nd August 2017 10:29 am

Different Counsel can reach different conclusions depending on- what information has been provided to them; what they have been asked to consider, and there own interpretation of the law/ precedent.
The opinion will remain privileged unless privilege is waived.
We do not know what body(ies) is(are) the subject of a potential JR- whether it is a JR of the SFA/SPL or the LNS commission.
However basic principles dictate that the findings of LNS could be quashed if, for example, same considered irrelevant or incorrect material or knowingly ignored relevant material. Similarly if the decision was one reached which no reasonable tribunal could have reached based on the evidence sane may be liable to JR.
Response from Auldheid 
 I think based on the SPFL response to a journo regarding the inclusion or exclusion of the wee tax case in the LNS Commission, that a matter considered irrelevant and so not properly examined was excluded. It was not just the lawfulness of the ebts that was left out but the omission of actual dishonesty, that was obvious from Rangers accepting, on QC advice , that RFC were liable to pay the tax owed under the DOS (wtc) scheme, the situation where they lied to HMRC about holding side letters for two players whilst at the same time (in Apr 2005 ) having 16 players on the books and  another 13 who had left, all with side letters at the time of enquiry.
 In the very act of passing the buck to the SPL to investigate the SFA avoided any charge under
Article 5
5. Obligations and Duties of Members
5.1 All members shall:-
(a) observe the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship in accordance with the rules of fair play
 (b) be subject to and shall comply with:-
(i) these Articles;
(ii) the Judicial Panel Protocol;
(iii) the Challenge Cup Competition Rules;
(iv) the Registration Procedures;
(v) International Match Calendar;
(vi) Club Licensing Procedures; and
(vii) any statutes, regulations, directives, codes, decisions promulgated by the Board, the Professional Game Board, the Non-Professional Game Board, the Judicial Panel, a Committee or sub-committee, FIFA, UEFA or the Court of Arbitration for Sport; 
(c) recognise and submit to the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport as specified in the relevant provisions of the FIFA Statutes and the UEFA Statutes;
 (d) respect the Laws of the Game;
 (e) refrain from engaging in any activity, practice or conduct which would constitute an offence under sections 1, 2 or 6 of the Bribery Act 2010; and
 (f) behave towards the Scottish FA and other members with the utmost good faith.
 Specifically a) and particularly f).
 It has always bemused me why the Judicial Panel charged CW of bringing the game into disrepute for a number of reasons including non payment of PAYE and VAT but not non payment and failure to meet his undertaking to pay the wtc bill. 
Further in the JP charge sheet Art 5.1 a gets a mention amongst a list but 5.1.a)and f) do not appear in the actual charges themselves.
What this means is that CW was found guilty by the JP but Rangers as a club and SFA member have never been charged with breaches of 5.1a and f.
What the wtc shows is evidence of dishonesty, but it is but one example of which Res12 evidence is so full there is even a map of dishonesty which would suggest to a criminal court that there was
” previous” (as in behaviour.)
It is because dishonesty is denied, in fact  LNS says there was no question of dishonesty, personal or corporate, regarding registration, in spite of it never been asked, that the attempts to put the matter to bed (which is what LNS appears to be an attempt at, have failed. The proper charge has been avoided but then again how could you allow any club with office bearers carrying that reputation into Scottish football, certainly without proper controls on it?
Ooops they just did.
The SFA or SPL would arguably be liable to JR if they deliberately stymied LNS or were procedurally incorrect in establishing LNS or acted wholly unreasonably.
 See my first comment. Although it was an SPL Commission that was no excuse to avoid SFA Articles. Indeed in recent interviews that has been the SPFL defence – as in that was not our job.
I should also add that the JR court would also look to whether any alternative remedy was open to the Applicant. I don’t know if UEFA or FIFA or CAS may have been approached.
It was my view from the off that the SFA should have been the commissioners (it was their registration witness that swung things) and CAS the court of appeal.
I don’t know why they pay thousands for lawyers – we just made the case fur nuthin!

Launch of SFSA Fans’ Survey
Very Well then – alone

Recent Comments by Auldheid

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
The allegations on CQN that Bobby Madden has a gambling problem surely require his  removal from the the firing line until the allegators are proved wrong.
No snap decisions, just a leisurely swim until there is no question as to his motivations. 

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Dons/Hibees/Jambos and any other club wanting a UEFA spot.
Flogging players who have put TRFC near top of league is an admission those players unaffordable.
The solution is to make a licence for TRFC conditional on a realistic sustainable business plan. SFA are not doing their licencing job. Never have in fact.
So what questions are your club Directors asking the SFA?
Why not get them to ask UEFA if they are happy with the way SFA process licence applications from Ibrox. Seems UEFA not happy.
Proper club licencing can level the playing field a bit but it also protects all clubs from charlatans selling jam tomorrow.

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Allyjambo 21.41

Matthew Lindsay: Time for Dave King to depart Rangers – but who could take over at the Ibrox club?

Rangers need to be run by individuals whose integrity is beyond doubt.
Do such individuals steeped in blue exist?

As rare as a dodo nesting on an iceberg in Carlisle Bay, Barbados.
” No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.” Albert Einstein

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
I got my electronic copy of Not The View delivered yesterday.
Browsing through I thought I recognised The Christmas Tale offering and was pleased to read it as I had forgotten it was a tale I told at Christmas in 2012 (on CQN I think).
I think it worth repeating as a reminder of why SFM exists – because we love football and we love Scottish football and we aren’t done yet.
See me?
See me?
Ah jist luv fitbaw.
Its funny cos I was never that interested until about age eleven when a good pal, who was destined never to see his 21st birthday after a car crash in Rome encouraged me to try it. John was there to become a priest but got fast tracked by the Big Man who knows a good guy when he sees wan.
John encouraged me to give it a go in Suffolk St.  We played “croassies in” with the metal pull down blinds that formed the gates to the interior of the Barras as goals. Plastic baws, Fridos then Wembleys, arrived about then and many a red hot poker made the game a bogey in a failed attempt at repairing a burst baw.
(I blame the whelk shells; they were aw ower the place from the Oyster Bar in the Gallowgate (where I was entrapped in the cellar two weekends in a row cleaning whelks and mussels) and the ravenous appetite of the Glasgow punter for shellfish.
I played fitbaw morning, noon and night and saw Glasgow Green pitches UPGRADED from black ash/clinker to red blaze. We thought we were Wullie Fernie playing on that stuff and there was a case for playing with 10 baws as teams were filled with tanner baw players (goalies were just last man standing) for whom the object of the game was to beat everybody else in the opposition before scoring or it wisnae a goal.
I remember wan night  at the Glasgow Green waiting to play for St Alphonsus v Our Lady of Fatima  when I saw Tony Green, who was a Mungo boy and went on to play for Newcastle and Scotland before injury ended his career too early, waiting, sannies under his arm, to get a game with any team who were a man short. I think the OLOF manager mugged wan of his boys as Tony appeared for them and turned a virtuoso performance against us to give OLOF a 3-2 victory.
I started work and went to London for a year to work in the old Post Office Savings Bank. In my first week Jock (a Jock) approached and asked if I played. He never mentioned the sport, he didnae hiv tae, we wur already communicating at the spiritual level only fitbaw lovers can reach (the kind of thing that electrifies CP on CL nights.)
I get directions fur a game oan the Saturday at Acton Town and turn up, new Puma boots, paid by my transfer grant, under my arm (nae sannies fur me) On entering the park ahm puzzled, there wiz GRASS everywhere, nae clinker or red blaze in sight.  “Must be roon the back of the dressing rooms “ I remember thinking.
Anyhoo I gets changed runs roon the back to see — MAIR grass as far as the eye can see. So I troop back tae the dressing rooms to get directions to the ash pitches. When I explain what ah wiz used to playin oan they aw jist looked at me like my village wiz searching fur their idiot.
Well I get sorted out and line up. The baw, I remember, wiz a size 5 orange wan, but no wan o they bricks wi laces. The first pass to me wiz high and ah chests the ball doon and whirls roon afore I get studded from the back as wiz the custom oan the narrow pitches of Glasgow Green. To ma amazement the nearest opponent to me is about 4 yards away. As I look into his eyes I smile and turn to Jock at the sidelines and shout.
“Yer gonnae need anither baw” as I meander off in pursuit of the only goal that counted for a tanner baw man. I think I managed 7 before netting and I’ll take that. It wiz oan unfamiliar grass after all.
 Postscript “Aye very guid Auldheid” yer thinking (if you have stayed with me so far.)
“Nice reminiscing and it is Christmas Eve, so thanks fur the memories. “
But there’s mer tae this tale fur
See me?
See me?
I jist luv fitbaw.
Its ma game, its  OOR game and when I see the mess those responsible for looking after its welfare have made of it ah want to do something.
I hope ahm not alone.
Dec 2012

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
That Dave King is allowed any influence in Scottiish football is a dereliction of the duty of the SFA to protect our game from criminality.

Dave King should be called to account by the other clubs via the SFA to provide evidence he can do what he has promised, which is bank roll TRFC.

At the very least the clubs should be preparing for another insolvency event at Ibrox and deciding the conditions they will set for TRFC to continue taking part in Scottish football on the same basis as every other club, who act with the utmost good faith to fellow members.

The clubs via the SFA have the powers under Club Licensing to do so, powers that the SFA Comp Off can only conclude the SFA have failed to utilise. Powers that UEFA must have recognised by now as a result of Res12 letter of May 2016 and UEFA Licence submission this year, are not being used fully by the SFA.  

It was self preservation that underpinned the 5 Way Agreement . The dangers of that agreement – destroying integrity, undermining trust, ignoring deceit – become more and more manifest and should alert other clubs to the necessity to exercise their collective responsibility to each other and so to our game that they govern via the SFA on our behalf, using Club Licensing powers.

When a particular course of action designed to preserve self is not working it is human nature to try another course.

Not renewing STs come April/May unless positive trust restoring actions are taken by our clubs collectively, is one way of changing minds about what is self preserving.

About the author