Since I have lost my voice this week to the Armageddon virus, we decided to do a mini, written version of TWM for your pleasure….
In Armageddon Lala Land (© S. Regan), it’s all falling apart in a major borefest.
The explosive first thirteen minutes of the match involving the two top teams in the country were just a dream from which we all sadly awoke – although in my experience one usually gets roused from a dream just as the good bit begins!
Meanwhile nobody in Airdrie, Alloa, Annan, Brechin, Cowdenbeath, Dundee, Forfar, Greenock, Kirkcaldy, Montrose, Peterhead, or East Kilbride noticed anything exciting about the playoffs – and to make matters worse, folk in Cowdenbeath & EK, Forfar & Peterhead, Brechin & Alloa and Dundee & Falkirk have more of this trouser-removal process to endure later this week.
The facts, despite the SFA, SPFL and MSM trying to undersell our game here in Scotland, tell a different story. The playoff system – after close finishes in all the leagues, top and bottom, is pure drama.
There will be tears and laughter in unequal measure of course. Already, Raith Rovers, the great love of our old friend the late Turnbull Hutton have joined Ayr United and Stenhousemuir in relegation. The same fate may yet befall two from Inverness, Motherwell and Hamilton in the top league. The Blue Brazil themselves, Cowdenbeath could face banishment from the SPFL altogether if they cannot beat the upwardly East Kilbride next week.
The truth is, that keeping expectations in a realistic check, the game in Scotland is in better shape than it has been for decades. The delusional, acquisitional David Murray-led charge to financial oblivion has ended. Clubs, well most of them anyway, are living within their means. Thankfully the banks, enablers of the financial doping of the last thirty years, are now playing the role of limiting the excesses of overspending that clubs previously enjoyed.
Doubts over the distribution of the available income streams aside, there is level playing field on which Scottish clubs play, and over the last few years, a host of clubs, including Inverness, Ross County, St Mirren, Kilmarnock and St Johnstone have achieved historic successes. Aberdeen have re-emerged as the second most consistent side in the country after several years of consistency that only Champions Celtic have bettered.
In fact the quality of attacking play – if not defending- on show at Pittodrie on Friday evening would have graced any top flight game in England. It is now to Celtic and Aberdeen as well as our other clubs in European competition, Rangers and St Johnstone, to demonstrate that Scottish football may well be the poor relations in the UK, but is no backwater hangout for hillbillies and banjo players
Celtic’s dominance of course is the elephant in the room. It’s a big cuddly green and white elephant of course if you are a Celtic fan, but phase two of post Armageddon Scotland will hopefully involve a meaningful challenge at the very top over the next few years.
Craig Whyte
Whisky Baron?
The Craig Whyte trial continued in Glasgow last week. The former Rangers chairman faces charges including one of ‘pretending’ to have funds to facilitate the ‘purchase’ of ‘Rangers’.
Things the court has heard from testimony up to now include;
- the claim that Ex-Rangers chief executive Martin Bain got a £360k bonus for the sale of the club,
- that Gary Withey, Craig Whyte’s lawyer through the acquisition of Rangers, thought that Whyte was a member of the Whyte & McKay Whisky company!
- that Ally McCoist had a contract with a substantial payoff clause if he was not chosen to succeed Walter Smith.
- Rangers already owed £6m to Ticketus at the time Whyte took over
- that David Murray had a deal with Lloyds: If he sold Rangers by a certain date, he would be able to regain ownership of MIM
Gary Withey, told the court that he thought Murray was desperate to get the deal over the line, that Murray’s team didn’t care where Whyte’s money had come from, and that in his opinion they knew that the deal was financed via Ticketus – this after the court had heard from other witnesses that Lloyd’s bank had threatened to withdraw Rangers’ credit and finance facilities if the board blocked the sale.
Significantly for matters outwith the confines of the case – and this has been incredibly under-reported by the main stream media – David Murray also told the court earlier that he had used EBT’s in order to get better players for Rangers than they could otherwise afford, re-igniting social media exchanges over the validity of William Nimmo-Smith’s report into Rangers use of EBT’s.
You may remember that Nimmo-Smith himself considered that Rangers had gained no sporting advantage by their use of the scheme – a conclusion diametrically at variance with Murray’s – the man who operated the scheme to achieve exactly that end.
Nimmo-Smith – Doubts?
If Murray is telling the truth, then it puts Nimmo-Smith’s conclusions in doubt. And even if you leave aside for the moment the amended and extremely creative terms of reference set by Neil Doncaster which effectively excluded the already known to be unlawful DoS EBTs from Nimmo-Smith’s team, the SPL has been shown up as a bit a joke.
Who knew?
Another sensational piece of info the court heard, which again has gone almost completely unreported, was that in an email from Mike McGill of Murray Group, dated 17 March 2011, he says “the (wee tax) case only recently went from a potential liability and had not “crystallised” until recently” – this long before a Euro licence was awarded to Rangers on the basis, according to Stewart Regan, that the bill had “not crystallised” when the licence was awarded.
It may be that that the laws of unintended consequences will prove to be more significant to football than the matter of Craig Whyte’s guilt or innocence.
All of the information on the case is what was said in court. None of it is to be taken as fact. That will be for the courts to decide. What is being reported is what witnesses have said in court. Also, there is a lot of hysteria, a lot of speculation going on in social media and the mainstream media over court proceedings.
Speculating on the innocence or guilt of a defendant, or the honesty of a witness is most definitely contempt of court territory. For obvious legal reasons, SFM wishes to stay on the right side of the law and avoid unnecessary problems with the courts.
But we also want to ensure that we are not party to contaminating people with speculation that may lead a defendant to be being mistakenly convicted or acquitted.
The purpose of a trial is establishing the facts of a case, not to merely validate so-called information or inferences that have been drawn before any legal process has begun. So we are asking everyone at SFM therefore to refrain from posting anything that implies guilt or innocence, truthfulness or untruthfulness, or anything which repeats unsubstantiated rumour.
We may think we know a lot, but it may well be the case as the trial progresses that we discover we knew less than we thought – so please keep that in mind when you post.
The news that it seems likely Clint Hill will not be offered a new contract at Rangers saddens me a little. Hill has been a consistent performer this year, playing with an energy, honesty and assuredness that was way in excess of many of his teammates and opponents alike. Hill is clearly not ready to retire, and I hope that he gets another year of football.
It will be interesting to see how many of the players who have been in the headlines this year will be leaving Scottish football. Hill looks to be gone, as does Emerson Hyndman. Will the likes of Moussa Dembele, Kieran Tierney, Scott Sinclair, Barrie McKay, Niall McGinn. A fair chance that some of them will. The challenge for our game is to keep a flow of that kind of talent ongoing. The more successful we are at that, the less resigned we will have to be about losing them.
As the season draws to a close, we still have promotion and relegation playoff battles to enjoy. There is the unresolved matter of ‘Invincible’ status for Celtic in their as yet unbeaten league campaign. We also have a proper showpiece finale to the season in two weeks as Aberdeen and Celtic go head to head in pursuit of the Scottish Cup.
In a few weeks, the transfer window will pique our interest as the off-field wars will be waged – with the added fun of the phantom journos in the MSM bringing us phantom stories of phantom Messis and Ronaldos headed for a hover-pitch near you – and the new season will immediately bring European drama to the door.
Who knows? Maybe the close season will see some proper football administrators brought in to replace the architects of Armageddon, tartan style. Sadly that sounds awfully like a Moonbeam.
It’s a quiet morning on here, and I generously deferred to Mrs C’s wishes to stay at home instead of travelling in for the ‘Trial’.
So I have a minute or two to send off an email that I was prompted to send by seeing on the European Club Association’s page a reference to a ‘workshop’ held on 15th May.
“To: the ECA
info@ecaeurope.com
Dear ECA,I was very interested to read the report on the ‘First ever ECA workshop on Club History & Museums’, held in Manchester on 15th May, 2017.
I wonder whether any emphasis was laid on the necessity of clubs ensuring that clubs which presently have, or are planning to have, a club ‘museum’, that they describe their football history truthfully and accurately?
The reason for my wonderment is that the ECA itself appears to have no regard for the truth.
I say this because the list of current members of the ECA includes a team called ‘Rangers’ ( as an associate member)
The ECA must surely know that the club called ‘Rangers’ that was a founder member of the ECA ceased to exist as football club in 2012, when it lost its membership of the Scottish Premier League and of the Scottish Football Association, by suffering the final ‘insolvency event’ which resulted in the club being put into Liquidation.
A new club was founded in 2012 and became entitled to participate for the first time in Scottish professional football only in that year, when its applications to join the then Scottish Professional Football League and the Scottish Football Association were reluctantly granted.
That new club’s legal name is “The Rangers Football Club Ltd”.
It is not, and could not possibly have been, a ‘founder member’ of the ECA.
The ECA should not, as a matter of legal and sporting truth, continue to imply that the liquidated club called “Rangers” is a member of the ECA by showing ‘Rangers’ as an ‘associate member’; because that “Rangers” no longer legally exists (except in Liquidation).
If it did exist as a football club, it would be obliged to accept the liability for all the debts owed to the creditors of “Rangers Football Club” , and the new club most certainly does not accept that liability.
The idea that a 5-year- old football club can be allowed to claim a history that belonged to a wholly different, now liquidated, legal entity is manifesty absurd.
Of course, if the 2012 “The Rangers Football Club Ltd” has become a member of the ECA since 2012,then it should be listed. BUT not as ‘Rangers’ but as “The Rangers Football Club Ltd”, so that people are not deceived into believing that it is the same club as the club that had been a ‘founder member’. .
In that way, the integrity of the ECA in matters of football club sporting history will not be subverted.
Yours sincerely,
(real name )
James Doleman @jamesdoleman 20s21 seconds ago
On 5 May 2011 Horne says he received a demand for £2.8m from HMRC for the “small tax case” to be paid within 30 days.
Game Set and Match to the Res 12 guys. Although I suspect that Findlay may be able to show that the bill initially came in earlier than that.
ALLYJAMBO
MAY 24, 2017 at 22:51
They haven’t even started to get to grips with the reality of their situation, have they?
————————————————-
This seems to the belated beginning of what several on here have been stating for a few years as a survival strategy for TRFC: austerity.
Part-time coaches, quitting the U-20 League, attempting to dispose of a number of players on relatively long-term contracts worth (reportedly, at least) £4k, £6k & more a week to be replaced by players on presumably less: somebody has tumbled to the fact that they cannot compete currently with CFC & are more financially aligned with e.g. AFC or HoMFC.
I wonder if Mr. Gilligan’s resignation was, at least partly, prompted by the unappetizing prospect of austerity & downsizing?
I also wonder if someone at the SFA has had a word to tell them they can’t continue as they have been.
JINGSO.JIMSIEMAY 25, 2017 at 10:55
While I appreciate players are coming to the end of contracts or are out of contract, I predicted some time ago that raiding the local competition for their best payers to strengthen T’Rangers and weakening the opposition would be their modus operandi.
Expect lots of Level 5 column inches like today saying Pedro is sniffing around Walker and Patterson.
Austerity is still required down Govan way but, with the careful management of the income streams they have, it should still be possible for T’Rangers to offer just that wee bit more by way of wages and conditions to pip the likes of Aberdeen and Hearts to certain players in the domestic market.
In terms of rebuilding squads next season will all come down to how clever folks are with their scouting and recruitment over the summer.
Maybe the imminent appointment of a Director of Football will resolve such issues and help Stevie in IT with the scouting?
As discussed the other day Hearts also have their work cut out. The return of Berra at least looks like a good start.
McInnes has the more settled squad but the Dons may still have to bring in a few key replacements.
It will be interesting to see how it all pans out.
I see that John James is quoting a post on this site (a post which appears to have been moderated).
Given his plangent views on sites; funding; bellies and backbones and freeloaders I assume he makes regular, healthy contributions to this site.
Ditto each and every site he obviously uses as he frequently makes reference to them.
Including James Doleman.
Jingso.JimsieMay 25, 2017 at 10:55
This seems to the belated beginning of what several on here have been stating for a few years as a survival strategy for TRFC: austerity.
…
______
Seems to me, though, Jingso, that despite this survival austerity, they continue to act as though they are a ‘big team’, ‘stealth survival austerity’ might be a more apt description. They are still, publicly at least, operating on the same basis as they did under Green, setting goals and expectations at a level way above that which they can reasonably expect to achieve. The danger being, that to give those expectations the veneer of possibility, more money has to be spent than when setting goals and expectations at a more realistic level.
Regards the recent reports of TRFC* being granted a UEFA licence by the SFA (and potentially UEFA), I was concerned at the acceptance on here by Hearts fans – and others – of Hearts’ apparent unwillingness to complain about it to the SFA/UEFA. I accept that we don’t know if Hearts are making complaints behind the scenes and I hope they are, in fact, doing so.
Nonetheless, it scares me when I see learned, informed posters on here making excuses about Hearts staying silent. It appears that the reasoning for this is that it doesn’t suit Hearts to complain for various reasons (they’re not ready for European football, they’ll be accused of being self-serving etc).]
It seems to me that these arguments fall down on all sorts of reasons. They won’t stand up for sporting integrity because it doesn’t suit them at the moment?!?!? That translates as ‘We’ll do what suits us and don’t care about what’s right’. That puts them in the same place as the club they should be complaining about….and if we’re condoning that, then we shouldn’t be on here complaining about TRFC* and the SFA. I realise that by not challenging the Continuity Myth, all our clubs are complicit and by prevaricating on Res12, CFC are, like Hearts, more directly guilty than other clubs, but we can’t be seen to support this selective lack of action by Hearts (if, indeed, that is what is happening).
In any event, let’s make sure that we, at least, are doing something about it. Go to ‘Contact us’ on UEFA.com and let them know about Scottish fans’ concerns about the apparent granting of a licence, the complicity of the SFA etc.
JINGSO.JIMSIE
MAY 25, 2017 at 10:55
…
I also wonder if someone at the SFA has had a word to tell them they can’t continue as they have been.
============================
You’re having a laugh – aren’t you JJ ?
Well done JC for getting onto the ECA – with an ‘absolutely’ reasonable and valid query.
And are we going to be running a book – to guess the player quoted in the most ridiculous lowLevel42 / SMSM story, suggesting a ‘possible move to Ibrox’ ?
Put me down for 10 quid on…John Terry ?
Not much this week of interest to us, I suppose, in the Whyte trial, but this has just caught my eye from James Doleman’s tweets – at the time, discussing the split of EBTs between MIH and RFC:
‘Horne adds the 85% 15% spilt reflected the level of wages football players received.’
Reflected level of wages players received. Aye, it sure did, nothing to do with loans. Remuneration, nothing else!
Another snippet from the trial:
Findlay Did Johnson adopt the view the tax case was the responsibility of Murray not the club?Horne “He may have when he became chairman”
So, if it’s not Murray’s (MIH) responsibility it was the club’s!
LUGOSI
May 25, 2017 at 11:42
I see that John James is quoting a post on this site (a post which appears to have been moderated).——————————————————–
Ok own up, who posted the phantom post?
Thought this was a good read,unlike today’s sports journalism.
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/celtic/celtic-2-1-inter-how-the-scotsman-reported-on-lisbon-glory-1-4456231
WOODSTEIN
MAY 25, 2017 at 16:48
=========================================
It certainly wasn’t me, I would have pointed out that avoiding tax isn’t a criminal offence and whilst the author doesn’t say “criminal” the wording and context tends to suggest it.
“This is a fraud as clear as day and there is no fall guy. The evidence points to a conspiracy to avoid tax and debts and as such a conspiracy cannot be committed alone.”
JOHN CLARKMAY 25, 2017 at 09:55
Hope you get a reply….keep up the good work
woodsteinMay 25, 2017 at 16:48
_______________________________________________________
OK it was me, with all my erudite posts and all
jean7brodie
May 25, 2017 at 20:50
———————————————-
From the website of the European Club Association:
“Further to requests from ECA Member Clubs and as a follow-up to the first ECA Club Management Guide published in 2015…”…..
“The following clubs have contributed to the ECA Club Management Guide:
“………..,Rangers FC (SCO),….” [note: 100 clubs from about 36 countries contributed]
God help me, but I can’t stop wondering about the nature of that contribution!
More seriously, and with reference to my email to the ECA, doesn’t the readiness of the directors of the member clubs of the ECA to swallow the big lie propagated by the SFA simply point up that they are essentially of the same stamp as the SDMs and CGs of the world?
That the high-flown language of FFP and ‘competitive friends’ and integrity and social responsibility is just a load of hypocritical ordure? Like mainstream politician-speak?
That ‘integrity’ takes a very second place to the desire to make money?
( And I was listening to the Hamilton game, and to the excitement about the sending off/penalty/ incident, as I was reading the ECA bumph, and I just thought: how does anyone , knowing how Scottish football is tainted at the top, and how rife football betting is among players, and how infinitesimally few are the drugs checks on players, and so on and on and on, believe that any game is an honest game?)
Have we all along, for God knows how long, been played for absolute mugs?
That is the damage that the whole rotten RFC(IL) saga has caused to me at least.
And I’ve just reminded myself that my query (as to whether the SFA’s assertion that UK Anti-doping had cut the money they provided to the SFA to help fund the anti-doping programme was the reason for the ridiculously low number of drug tests on footballers) has not been replied to.
So I have written a letter-an actual, physical letter, not an email, to the CEO of UK Anti-doping, which I will print out and send by snailmail tomorrow.
The letter reads as follows:
“Nicole Sapstead,
Chief Executive Officer,
UK Anti-doping,
-6 Salisbury Square,London, EC4 4Y 8AE
Dear Chief Executive Officer,
I have written several emails to UK Anti-doping.
I have received several automated replies, acknowledging receipt.
I have not yet received a substantive reply to my query.
If I tell you that my first email was sent on 15th February 2017 you will readily appreciate that it is not acceptable that at 26th May I have had no reply.
Would you please be so good as to have someone simply answer my query?
Thank you.
Yours faithfully,
(real name etc) “
And, at the same time as they were calling the Celtic supporters ‘paranoid’…!!!
The following three tweets from James Doleman, show just how ‘paranoid’ they were at Rangers, and not just the ordinary supporters either, this is what Alistair Johnston was saying in a board conference call. Yes, they weren’t paranoid, it was just that everyone else was out to get them
Tweets:
“Findlay opens by showing the court a minute of a conference call, 31 May 2010. Participants, McGill, Horne, Bain and Alistair Johnston Call was to discuss the “big tax case”
Call was to discuss the “big tax case”
Continues ” group and the club are being targeted by the revenue.. speculation..an anti-RFC sentiment amongst HMRC individuals”
It’s amazing what can happen to a business with a mindset that blames everyone else for it’s own failings…and tax dodges.
https://twitter.com/jamesdoleman/status/868032931956228096
Of all the planning, negotiations, and numerous number crunching sessions employed to try to formulate a plan to rescue Rangers(I.L.) from insolvency, its remarkable that not one of these great minds had the foresight to say,
“Ach it’s only a daft holding Co, engine room subsidiary thingy”…..”Whit’s a’ the fuss aboot?”
Or indeed “What if we offered to pay the tax, or indeed assisted the investigation in an attempt to iron out the clear misunderstanding re ‘wages’?”
Could this be the smoking gun?
JD’s tweets:
Findlay on Ticketus funds “Would it surprise you if the takeover panel knew”Horne “That would surprise me.”
Findlay shows the witness a “file note” 30 March 2011, says from a Raymond Phillips at the takeover panel1/2
“Current proposal Craig Whyte would use future sales of season tickets to replace Lloyds bank funding”
Findlay A whole range of people knew about Ticketus deal, obvious Murray could have found outHorne: Not obvious at all, we had no knowledge
Findlay “If you want something in a contract you put it in clear terms, you didn’t “Horne “badly drafted” need to read other document
Me:
There was an ‘unfortunate’ exchange (see below) between the witness and Mr Findlay just prior to this, I wonder if the witness has played in to counsel’s hands?
JD tweeted:
Horne, “You can’t read the share purchase agreement in isolation from other documents Mr Findlay”
Findlay “Are you seriously suggesting you signed a contract without a remedy if it was broken?”Horne “You are a criminal lawyer Mr Findlay”
Adds “Not a corporate lawyer”Findlay “Discourtesy doesn’t help”Horne “Don’t take it personally Mr Findlay”Judge intervenes”
Lady Stacey “We have to listen to this, discourtesy doesn’t help anyone”
easyJamboMay 25, 2017 at 10:45
James Doleman @jamesdoleman 20s21 seconds ago On 5 May 2011 Horne says he received a demand for £2.8m from HMRC for the “small tax case” to be paid within 30 days.
Game Set and Match to the Res 12 guys. Although I suspect that Findlay may be able to show that the bill initially came in earlier than that.
====================
As soon as RFC accepted in March 2011 that they owed HMRC for tax pre dating 31 Dec 2010, then according to the Giannina FC case that set out UEFA’s intent for Article 50 of FFP, which was confirmed by CAS when Giannina lost an appeal to them, an overdue payable as UEFA define it existed.
It could be discounted as such if by 31st March 2011:
1. It had been paid.
2. A written agreement signed by HMRC to postpone collection was in place
3. An appeal had been made
4. The basis of the case supporting the existence of an overdue payable was frivolous. (all in full at Annex VIII of UEFA FFP).
None of the above conditions existed at 31st March, although there is a note by an MIH employee and reference to a discussion on postponing collection proceedings until after Takeover when the liability was accepted in March. As is shown by 2 this is not enough to comply with UEFA FFP.
If the SFA knew of this postponement ploy under 2, then the HMRC letters of 5th and 20th May would have alerted them, if provided to them by RFC (as required by FFP), that the last possible excuse for granting a licence had gone. Non disclosure of documents appear from court to be a feature of the Board management style at RFC pre Takeover, a tradition that seems to have been carried on post takeover
There was plenty of time between the 6th May 2011 when Takeover happened and 26th May when the list of clubs granted a licence was given to UEFA for this semblance of an excuse to be checked by SFA under the powers of Article 43 to approach HMRC and licence refused but according to Regan the SFA had no further responsibility to do anything after licence granted on 31st March and then its over to UEFA. This does not make sense if UEFA don’t know which clubs have a licence until end of May.
There already was a very strong case to investigate what went on in 2011 as a result of the Res12 lawyer’s endeavours and it has become even stronger as witness testimony and documentation provided in court confirm the basis on which Res12 was established
However with the passage of time UEFA do not need so much to establish if their process was followed as they intended based on court testimony, but they would appear to have a responsibility to see what did take place in order to tighten their processes, which fail if a club lies and the national association don’t do the job UEFA expect them to.
ALLYJAMBO
MAY 26, 2017 at 10:46
I remember a time when a group of Scottish Sports hacks would have been quite happy to accept if Alistair Johnston told them the moon was made of green cheese. In my opinion he is deeply discredited to say the least, but still receives no media criticism to this day. Clearly certain associations in life still guarantee protection in Scotland.
Is this the same alistair johnston
That came out with the statement of
At this club we have a saying and its two words ,one is surrender and the other is no .
It was in an interview and made no sense to the context of the conversation ,made me think at the time that wee had not seen the last of this man
Auldhied you and the rest of the res 12 guy have been vindicated
I live in hope that , just like Watergate it’s the cover up rather than the crime that sees the guilty face justice
It appears, from the evidence so far, that David Murray received a rather handsome reward from Lloyds for getting rid of Rangers to Craig Whyte as the clock ran down on the bank’s patience. Now, I have no sympathy for the man, whatsoever, but I do wonder if Alistair Johnston was aware of the Lloyds largess, and if he knew about it, did he find out at the time, or at a later date?
I imagine the anger in the man is at boiling point if it is only as a result of these proceedings that he has found out about this arrangement that led to his beloved club being thrown under a bus!
ALLYJAMBOMAY 26, 2017 at 20:58
An interesting read Q&A
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/ibrox-chairman-alastair-johnston-gives-1099163
AJ: “Donald Muir was imposed on David as well. Apparently Donald did a good job for the Murray Group. So I think David was conflicted. I’m not here to blame David for any of this.”
AllyjamboMay 26, 2017 at 20:58
‘..It appears, from the evidence so far, that David Murray received a rather handsome reward from Lloyds for getting rid of Rangers to Craig Whyte as the clock ran down on the bank’s patience….’
______________________
Yes, something of the order of thirty pieces of silver.
Or was that some other infamous wretch who at least had shame and remorse enough to hang himself?
2 APR 2011
“There’s been focus on that and the implications of a negative HMRC situation.” JT: “You say you have set aside money for potential tax issues. What exactly does that mean?”
AJ: “There are two HMRC situations. One has been ongoing and another one, which is noted in the accounts, has just arisen in the last couple of months.”
JT: “Is that about £3m?”
AJ: “It’s £2.8m. Our numbers today would be £2.8m better if it wasn’t for the fact we had to take this charge.”
JT: “What is it related to? Two players in particular?”
AJ: “It relates to more than two or three players and an issue 10 or 11 years ago. As the Americans say, this one came out of left-field.
“It’s really frustrating because nobody knew about it a couple of months ago.” JT: “So why wasn’t this flagged up?”
AJ: “I don’t know. These were schemes that abounded 10,11,12 years ago. The reason it has come home to roost right now is as a result of another tax case which set a precedent and allowed HMRC to revisit an issue from 10 years ago.”
KJ: “Has this impacted on Craig Whyte’s attempts to buy the club?”
AJ: “It’s a cash-flow issue somebody has to pay for. As far as I’m concerned, we don’t have it in our budget.”
KJ: “So Craig Whyte would have to take it on?”
AJ: “It’s obviously got to be a factor in my opinion.”
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/ibrox-chairman-alastair-johnston-gives-1099163
————————————
just for a compare and contrast timeline if anyone wants a read.
From jamesdoleman You were prepared to pay PWC to produce glossy brochures, how much did you spend doing due diligence on Whyte Horne “Not very much, nothing”
Findlay “The only thing you did was take Withey’s say so” Horne “We did searches on the internet”
Findlay “You could have investigated everything about Whyte from his first piggy bank to his inside leg measurement” 1/2
———————–
From ALASTAIR JOHNSTON 2 APR 2011
AN Other: “You were right to be sceptical of the previous take-over attempt. Are you less sceptical of this one?”
AJ: “Yes. The money spent on due diligence – albeit it went on too long – and his continued commitment of time, effort and money to advance discussions have been significant.”
————
Hope it’s ok by james i used a couple of his tweets
So many failed memories at the trial. From so many “professionals”.
Makes you wonder about engaging an Estate Agent never mind a lawyer.
Cluster OneMay 26, 2017 at 22:24
‘…..it has come home to roost..’
___________________
The cheating by SDM has certainly come home to roost. And very bad cess to him.
Now we wait to nail the SFA on the licence issue!
The contemptible SDM’s RFC died by his hand, while he made sure he was all right. He will find his place among the infamous.
Of much more importance is that Sporting Integrity in effect died at the hands of the body, charged with ensuring the integrity of Scottish Football, when it lied to the CFCB to try to get that cheating club some dosh from participating in the CL.
And as for that interview: Traynor and ‘Radar’ as Bernstein and Woodward?
I am convulsed with laughter at the very idea that those two even pretended to be journalists seeking truth.
Findlay “You could have investigated everything about Whyte from his first piggy bank to his inside leg measurement”
This about sums up that the events in Glasgow High Court were not meant to happen. If you think about this, these people been investigated are professionals in the finance industry, ever day these people tick boxes dot and cross carry out strict diligence in line with strict codes and practices, what was special about this one that due diligence was to be waved aside, just a thought.
And mentioning the SFA, I posted today my letter, yes, an actual word-processor physical letter, in an envelope on which the address was hand-written, using a Parker fountain pen, with Quink ink!
Oh, the joys of former times!
bigboab1916May 27, 2017 at 00:59
‘…what was special about this one that due diligence was to be waved aside, just a thought.’
______________
You know,me masel personally, I love those kind of old-fahioned crime novels, where there turns out to be a mastermind behind the petty, small-beer lowlives who commit the crime. Like Blofeld with the White pussycat in that Bond movie.
I had aspirations once to be a novelist, dreaming up improbable story lines.
Perhaps real life shows that the ‘improbable’ may sometimes be the all too actual, and that one ‘couldn’t make it up!’
Let’s hope that Lady Stacey is aware of a distinct pattern emerging in her courtroom – that of the selective retrograde amnesia displayed by several witnesses who seem to have the mental capacity to recall certain minute details from yesteryear, but somehow draw a blank when it comes to remembering what might turn out to be incriminating evidence, allegedly.
While I’m on here, can I just mention that JJ has had another go at SFM for no obvious reason. Can the mods confirm that he has made several financial donations to SFM recently, as it’s obvious he’s an avid visitor to this site and he would not want to be classed as a rank hypocrite, given his frequent and grubby demands for money from those who visit his own site.
HIGHLANDER
MAY 27, 2017 at 08:05
=======================================
From the man who gave you the latest well researched exclusive.
“Maurice Johnson’s controversial signing in 1989 was accompanied by a tax dodge of some sort prior to Murray really making a fist of tax evasion at a later date.”
“… a tax dodge of some sort …”
Genius.
bigboab1916May 27, 2017 at 00:59
Findlay “You could have investigated everything about Whyte from his first piggy bank to his inside leg measurement”This about sums up that the events in Glasgow High Court were not meant to happen. If you think about this, these people been investigated are professionals in the finance industry, ever day these people tick boxes dot and cross carry out strict diligence in line with strict codes and practices, what was special about this one that due diligence was to be waved aside, just a thought.
______________________________
Might I suggest: an inducement to sell, and the certain knowledge that proper due diligence might mean the loss of that inducement, made this one ‘special’?
All along, during the sale process, the main concern of the vendor was to appear as the Real Rangers Man he was always believed to be by those that matter to Real Rangers Men. I am sure, at first, he genuinely wanted to see Rangers sold to a reputable, and wealthy, businessman or consortium, for this would have enhanced that exalted position, but as time went by he became more desperate, and then HMRC came calling (again, but with solid evidence on their side this time
). It was a desperate and greedy man driving the sale of Rangers, and one who, but for the trial of the man he sold a pup to, would be sitting pretty now, not just as a very wealthy man, but one whose exalted position was still intact. Amazingly, it seems that he was so exalted, that regardless of what evidence of his lack of concern for the club comes out, the majority of bears cannot bring themselves to acknowledge his part in the ‘Rangers Downfall’ (acknowledgement to PMGB). This last part is due, almost entirely, to the complicity of the SMSM.
I wouldn’t know, for I seldom require chip-wrappers, but has the headline ‘Murray did no due diligence on Whyte’ appeared in a Scottish newspaper yet? Or ‘Murray was rewarded by Lloyd’s to the tune of £150m for selling Rangers to Whyte’? I suspect not.
PS. If my assessment of Murray’s motivation for the sale of Rangers to Whyte is in any way inaccurate, can someone put me right, for I am basing my assessment on what I believe to have been said in court.
Re the lack of due diligence regarding C. Whyte:
Was there an utterance of ‘Ah ken his faither’ from someone, which perhaps contributed to this apparent lapse in good practice?
Jingso.JimsieMay 27, 2017 at 10:35
Re the lack of due diligence regarding C. Whyte:Was there an utterance of ‘Ah ken his faither’ from someone, which perhaps contributed to this apparent lapse in good practice?
____________________–
Whether or not Murray knew Whyte or any of his family prior to his involvement with Rangers is of little consequence, for there can be little, or no, doubt that Murray was in a position where he had contacts, who had contacts, who had contacts that would enable him to make a few phone calls to establish basic facts about any UK businessman, and quickly establish that Whyte was either:
a) A spiv operating in the murkiest regions of business acquisitions, or
b) No one had ever heard of him.
In either case, that should have been enough for Murray to decide that he couldn’t trust Whyte to fulfil the conditions that he felt so necessary to secure the future of Rangers, and so, under a), tell him to get to Falkirk (not the club), or b) set proper due diligence in motion.
Only in the event that Murray couldn’t care less about what happened to Rangers after he dumped it, could his pre-sale actions, or inactions, be explained!
A simple check on the internet at the time made it very easy to establish exactly what Whyte was and what he did. It is difficult if not impossible to find the same material nowadays as the rules changed, at least in Europe.
I just made a check for Craig Whyte Liberty Capital, at the bottom of the results page is the following
“Some results may have been removed under data protection law in Europe.”
Click this link to find out more. https://www.google.co.uk/policies/faq/
FAQ
How are you implementing the recent Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) decision on the right to be forgotten?”
The ruling is from May 14.
ALLYJAMBOMAY 27, 2017 at 09:33
I wouldn’t know, for I seldom require chip-wrappers, but has the headline ‘Murray did no due diligence on Whyte’ appeared in a Scottish newspaper yet? Or ‘Murray was rewarded by Lloyd’s to the tune of £150m for selling Rangers to Whyte’? I suspect not.
————————Not Murray himself but Murray’s Firm.
Maybe AJ just got it wrong
From ALASTAIR JOHNSTON 2 APR 2011AN Other: “You were right to be sceptical of the previous take-over attempt. Are you less sceptical of this one?”AJ: “Yes. The money spent on due diligence – albeit it went on too long – and his continued commitment of time, effort and money to advance discussions have been significant.”
pic below
ALLYJAMBO
MAY 27, 2017 at 09:33 hope picture works
ALLYJAMBO
MAY 27, 2017 at 11:37
Whether or not Murray knew Whyte or any of his family prior to his involvement with Rangers is of little consequence, for there can be little, or no, doubt that Murray was in a position where he had contacts, who had contacts, who had contacts that would enable him to make a few phone calls to establish basic facts about any UK businessman, and quickly establish that Whyte was either:
a) A spiv operating in the murkiest regions of business acquisitions, orb) No one had ever heard of him.
———————————————
You’re making a case that SDM (and his minions) didn’t do their DD on Whyte simply because they wanted to sell ASAP & didn’t care to whom that was.
All I’m doing is suggesting that the lack of DD may have been down to another reason: someone in the ‘Inner Circle’ at MIH/MGH/RFC simply vouchsafing for Whyte (or his father, who, as far as I can remember was more of a ‘Rangers man’ than Craigy-boy) & that view being accepted as given & obviating the need for good business practice.
And while we’re talking about Alastair Johnston; didn’t he say in an interview that he and his board had set in motion investigations resulting in a report that described Whyte as, amongst other things, a ‘fuyant’ and so not to be trusted? I don’t remember this mentioned in court (it may yet be), and it seems to have been established that very little due diligence was actually carried out. Could it be that the supplier of succulent lamb is not the only ex-board member who has issued statements to distance himself from any hint of a lack of Rangersness in the sale of the club to Whyte? Or has it perhaps been decided by respective counsels that this revelation would not be in the best interest of their case?
HOMUNCULUSMAY 27, 2017 at 11:46 Rate This
A simple check on the internet at the time made it very easy to establish exactly what Whyte was and what he did. It is difficult if not impossible to find the same material nowadays as the rules changed, at least in Europe.
I just made a check for Craig Whyte Liberty Capital, at the bottom of the results page is the following
“Some results may have been removed under data protection law in Europe.”
————————
From jamesdoleman You were prepared to pay PWC to produce glossy brochures, how much did you spend doing due diligence on Whyte Horne “Not very much, nothing”Findlay “The only thing you did was take Withey’s say so” Horne “We did searches on the internet”
——————
Maybe Horne just did internet search after May 14.
I have to go with the school of thought that any Due Diligence” was at most window dressing and that Murray was selling his shares (in fact giving them away) to anyone who was willing to take them. So long as they accepted responsibility for everything he had done up to that point, and all the debt that went with it.
He was well aware of what he was doing and did it anyway, he wanted out.
HOMUNCULUSMAY 27, 2017 at 12:01
He was well aware of what he was doing and did it anyway, he wanted out.
————————-
And with a no Embarrassment or bad publicity clause to seal the deal
Jingso.JimsieMay 27, 2017 at 11:53
I wasn’t disagreeing with you, merely pointing out that regardless, it would still have been easy for a man like Murray to establish that proper due diligence was required on Whyte. As it is, testimony has been given, and hasn’t been challenged, that Murray and Whyte had never met before and that Murray had no knowledge of the man until his interest in buying Rangers was known. We either accept such evidence or not, but if we don’t, how can we justify accepting any other testimony from the trial, unless documentary supporting evidence exists? I acknowledge, though, that we might yet hear evidence from the defence that Whyte was, in fact, known to Murray.
Even in the event that he did trust Whyte’s father’s opinion of his son, it must be inevitable that a man like Murray wouldn’t accept this alone (I doubt Murray really trusts anyone, ever), and would have made a few phone calls regardless. ‘How does he make his money?’ would have been an obvious question to his father, giving any subsequent enquiry a starting point, quickly establishing that Whyte doesn’t ‘turnaround’ distressed companies, he kills them off for personal profit!
Of course, it may well be that Murray used Whyte’s father’s opinion of his son as a half-hearted attempt at due diligence, satisfying himself of Whyte’s suitability in a way he would not have accepted had self interest not been his main, or only, motivation for the sale.
The point is, whether or not Murray was lax in his duty towards shareholders and the business, that, by his lack of due diligence in the case of Whyte, he deserves the disdain of all Rangers supporters, and, perhaps, their hatred (and who would want their hatred?), rather than the messiah status he continues to hold in their eyes.
Cluster OneMay 27, 2017 at 11:50
Attachment
ALLYJAMBOMAY 27, 2017 at 09:33 hope picture works
_____________-
Thanks for that, CO, I can go out and get chips for my dinner now
As a reminder of how a proper football club board does due diligence on behalf of the club’s supporters, rather than for their own benefit.
If I remember correctly, before Rangers, David Murray tried to buy Ayr United, a club not in the best of health at the time, but the board of the club decided it was not in the club, nor the supporters, best interest to sell to the man who later took Rangers to glory and death, while Ayr missed out on the glory, but avoided the death!
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/rangers-crisis-shows-we-were-right-858421
Rangers crisis shows we were right to turn down David Murray, says ex-Ayr United director
FOR years they were mocked as the men who missed an open goal, the so-called bungling board at Ayr who knocked back David Murray’s fortunes.
……
“I can’t remember specifically how much was offered but it certainly wasn’t a million and, most crucially, there would be an obligation for the club to pay that money back to Murray in time.
“That was the main reason why we voted against the bid. I have always told people who questioned our decision it was based on what we believed was best for the club.
@ Allyjambo at 1248:
You’ve misunderstood my post of 1153.
I didn’t infer that Whyte Senior vouchsafed for his son; rather that someone in the ‘Inner Circle’ may have known Senior through the relatively small Scottish business community, liked the cut of his jib & this was sufficient to give Junior a pass on DD.
JINGSO.JIMSIE
MAY 27, 2017 at 16:15
==============================
Sorry but the notion that they ignored proper due diligence on a deal worth so many millions, based on the fact that someone knew the person’s Father and though he was a decent spud is at best a feeble excuse.
The answer requiring the lowest number of assumptions is normally the correct one. Getting out was more important than the results of any proper due diligence.
That was my belief before the Court case started and it still is. Alastair Johnston as much as said it at the time. The bank told Murray to sell, end of story.
If you run through a VPN and check say google Australia, you get all the results. Some quite interesting.
Did you know, for example, that HMRC actually seized the £2.8m in September 2011?
http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/tax/hmrc-policy/rangers-fc-under-arrestment-by-hmrc
There will be some gems in the search return, I’m sure
SCOTTC
MAY 27, 2017 at 19:53
==============================
I know what you are saying Scott, and am aware of several online search engines based elsewhere in the World.
I would however point out that an arrestment order is not the same as seizing cash.
If I remember correctly the “wee tax case” formed part of the debt which led to the administration. If they had seized the money it would no longer be a debt to them.
scottc May 27, 2017 at 19:53
=================
HMRC did ultimately get access to those funds arrested in September 2011. However, rather than put the cash towards the WTC, HMRC diverted it to pay some of the outstanding VAT and PAYE bills.
EASYJAMBO
MAY 27, 2017 at 21:24
=============================
Forgive me but how do you know that the bank paid the arrested money to HMRC.
Surely an arrestment only holds the money in an account, what facility did HMRC use to force them to pay that cash to them. I don’t think the arrestment would do that.
Homunculus May 27, 2017 at 21:37
EASYJAMBO MAY 27, 2017 at 21:24 =============================
Forgive me but how do you know that the bank paid the arrested money to HMRC.
Surely an arrestment only holds the money in an account, what facility did HMRC use to force them to pay that cash to them. I don’t think the arrestment would do that.
======================
I knew I had read it previously, so I did a search of my files and found the reference in the D&P Creditors report dated 5 April 2012.
9.26 In September 2011 HMRC arrested approximately £2.9m held in the Company‟s accounts with BOS in respect of tax arrears. On 24 November 2011, the Company agreed to release the arrested funds to HMRC, which were used to settle certain outstanding VAT arrears on instruction of the Company.
If the above statement by D&P was a true reflection of what happened, then it suggests that HMRC was active in its efforts to have the outstanding VAT bill paid, contrary to the claims that they had done nothing since September 2011 (when RFC stopped making social tax payments) until the Administration order in February 2012.
EASYJAMBO
MAY 27, 2017 at 21:44
=============================
Cheers EJ, thanks for that.
I didn’t realise that the arrested funds had actually been paid to HMRC.
Homunculus May 27, 2017 at 21:54
EASYJAMBO MAY 27, 2017 at 21:44 =============================
Cheers EJ, thanks for that.
I didn’t realise that the arrested funds had actually been paid to HMRC.
=============================
It’s incredible how much information there is out there, and how much you forget over time. I’ve retained a lot of info and do on occasion re-read some of the documents to refresh my memory.
While I was looking for the above reference, I came across a document I had mis-filed re the WTC, dated 30 August 2011, just three (?) days before the arrestment order. I don’t want to post it on here, at the moment, because of the court proceedings, but it does state in bold, upper case and underlined text ARREARS DUE NOW, with the amount outstanding having reached over £3m.
Decisions, decisions, decisions! Which court business should I attend on Tuesday?
The CW trial in Glasgow, or this, that I’ve just noticed in the Rolls of Court of Sesssion
“LORD BANNATYNE – L McNamara, Clerk
Tuesday 30th May
……….
Starred Motion at 10.00am
P231/17 Note: RFC 2012 Plc for Directions under Insolvency Act 1986 Brodies LLP ”
I wonder whether this might be somehow related to BDO’s action v D&P?
HomunculusMay 27, 2017 at 17:39
‘…….. Getting out was more important than the results of any proper due diligence. ..’
______________
Indeed so.
But perhaps the possibility of designing a way of legally ‘getting out’ that might offer the opportunity of legally getting back in again, cheaply and debt free, is never far from the minds of businesses in debt!
https://youtu.be/G4AT3xk3yXs nice effect scene of Rogic’s goal among the elements.
I think the young Celtic full back has every right to be angry after his clash and trip to hospital yesterday.
I also thought that Rob McLean and his panel on BBC at half time must have been looking at a different stream than we were and came to their conclusions for editorial reasons unknown.
I’d have given it a straight red.
Fair dos Finloch. It would have squared up the three blatant body checks, the two retaliations and more than one instance of deliberatly taking away of a players feet whilst in the air making no effort at the ball all committed by one player. Or was that not on your stream either?
im saying no more on it.
I sometimes wonder if people actually watch a game before commenting on it.
“Rogic replaced McGregor. This substitution paid off when he scored the winner with a deft chip.”
He got the ball about 35 yards out, ran into the box and put it under the keeper from about 3 yards. There was no chipping involved.
HOMUNCULUS
rogic came on for tierney
TONY
MAY 28, 2017 at 09:57
================================
Indeed, and McGregor moved to cover the left back position with Rogic going into midfield.
McGregor gave the ball away for the Aberdeen attack which really should have led to them going back into the lead.
I was really just mentioning the bit which described a goal that didn’t actually happen. Well not in that game.
It’s ironic that if Stockley hadn’t clattered Tierney (intentional or not) Rogic might not have come off the bench.
I know that there are naysayers out there, (both sides of the border) in respect of the standard of Scottish football but the achievements of Celtic this season are worth a mention.
An undefeated domestic treble is a momentous feat. There are an awful lot of European leagues dominated by just the one or two teams but how often do others achieve such a record?
Putting together a run of this nature requires more than just talent. From my vantage point here in Essex what has impressed me the most is the sheer relentless drive and professionalism of BR and his squad.
Congratulations.
Oh well that’s the close season nearly upon us, looking forward to watching the decider between Hamilton Accies and Dundee Utd. this afternoon. Then from tomorrow the usual onslaught of rumour mongering from the press. Who’s coming, who’s going, usually just guess work. It gets really tiresome. Wish they would just report on actual transfers concluded.
The European qualifiers begin in late June so we have that to look forward to. Hope our teams make a good showing from themselves this year although there is one team who should probably not be there from a financial point of view, but that’s another story for better qualified posters on here than me.
JIMBOMAY 28, 2017 at 14:34 2 Votes
Oh well that’s the close season nearly upon us, Then from tomorrow the usual onslaught of rumour mongering from the press. Who’s coming, who’s going, Who the new shirt sponsors are what your new club football top will look like.usually just guess work. (Down ibrox way it will be just that.Guess work) It gets really tiresome. Wish they would just report on actual transfers concluded.