Make our Mind Up Time

I have been receiving quite a bit of  unflattering mail about the “agenda” being pursued on this blog. Depending on the correspondent, that is defined as  either denying people their civil right to gloat, hiding the “truth” that people of the RC faith are welcomed and encouraged to come to Ibrox, or indulging in Chamberlain-style appeasement with the banning of the “H” word and other incontrovertible rights-to-insult.

The objection to moderation of any sort appears to be at the root of these diatribes. Our position here in terms of moderation is clear. There is no “agenda” other than a desire not to be chasing up posts containing the rantings and ravings of partisan types who “demand” their right to be heard no matter how objectionable it might be to those hear it. We are not here to service a conduit for conspiracy theories based in Masonic Lodges or the Vatican. There are plenty of places where people can indulge in that kind of stuff, but the moderators here are just not interested. The administration of the site takes around four hours per day. That’s a long time trawling through posts which often set out deliberately to insult, abuse or otherwise cause offence – mildly or otherwise.

Our view is that the blog will only have cross-club support if we stick to what we can substantiate by fact or reasonably infer from the way things proceed. Further, we feel that if we are to gain credibility as an alternative source of news and comment to the MSM, that we need to cut down on the fansite type comments. There is no dignity (a word often used here) in calling the Rangers manager or their fans names. We need to maintain higher standards of impartiality than football fansites, because we know that a united fan base can actually make a difference as RTC did when the SPL chairmen were gearing up for a parachute for the new Rangers. OT discussions are fine, and often amusing, but they shouldn’t become the main reason to come here.

The requirement to have a WordPress account before posting here is not in any way draconian. It is designed to make people accountable for what they post whilst still maintaining anonymity, and therefore being exempt from moderation. Those who don’t like it are not being compelled to carry out any instruction – they only need go to a place where they don’t feel so constrained.

If the main issue of this blog becomes how the blog is being administered – or how the moderation policy is affecting the human rights of posters, we may as well just pack up now.

There have never been any objections to the suggested posting rules on here. We assume that people who post are reasonably intelligent. Therefore it seems fair to assume that those who have ignored the suggested posting rules did so deliberately. If that doesn’t happen, moderation is just not required.

If what we are trying to do fails because of our posting framework, then we will be blamed. We are certain though, that we can have no credibility if we indulge ourselves in conspiracy theories and constant references to anachronistic organisations, the Scottish school system, and the leanings of referees.

There is real corruption in Scottish football. It is based not on religious rivalries but on greed and acquisitiveness. The only thing that matters is that we identify that corruption and help put an end to it.

Our job is to ask questions and not jump to our own conclusions about the answers. That will divide us as surely as the realisation of the depth of the corruption united us. To be totally united as fans, we need to have more Rangers fans on here. Therefore we need to create an atmosphere that they can be comfortable with. Is that the case right now? The anger for RFC’s mismanagement and abuse of the game in Scotland is real, but we need to look forward if we are truly committed to ensuring that what happened to Rangers can’t happen again.

We’re not gonna throw the toys out of the pram here. If anyone else would like to run the blog under those circumstances of zero moderation, we will be happy to hand over the domain. There is no “agenda” – we will be happy to hand the work over to others.

The initial posting which proposed the change to WordPress logins received over 130 TUs and only three TDs. Subsequently the post advising of the changes got around 100 TUs and 100 TDs. It seems that minds are not entirely made up.

To get some closure on this once and for all, we have added a poll below to end on Saturday at 1700 where you can decide whether you want to go along with our original plan in terms of login and moderation. We obviously recommend that you vote “Yes”

This entry was posted in General by Trisidium. Bookmark the permalink.
Tom Byrne

About Trisidium

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

2,133 thoughts on “Make our Mind Up Time


  1. doontheslope says:
    September 27, 2012 at 10:05

    I do think he has a point about ideology and there is evidence. Decades of failure to employ people of a certain religious persuasion, quite blatant masonic references/appeals in Press releases, Orange strips, honest mistakes, Donald Findlay’s choice of party piece, etc..

    Charles Green certainly recognises that if he doesnt pander to the more ideologically driven Rangers fan, whatever money there is will dry up.

    I still don’t see any of that having a bearing on how Rangers have been treated. It’s fun to imagine a scary conspiracy, but I doubt people in such positions of power are likely to risk their careers to help Rangers, or any other club, just because they have some links to religious/masonic/orangeism/DFQC.

    Positions of influence in society have been quite well infiltrated by people who do not at all share such inclinations and would not be so stupid as to be oblivious to such a conspiracy.

    If anything, Surrender-No’s recent barely codified masonic appeal for mercy shows how weak his position is – if there really was such a conspiracy, or if S-N and those who have been running Rangers really had such influence throughout the upper echelons of society as you suggest, S-N would not have had to make such a ridiculous statement to get his point across.

    Green’s pandering to the Rangers fans by whatever means, ideological or otherwise, seems irrelevant to any suction he might have with people in important positions. He’s just getting their cash by whatever means he can, in the fashion of some rabble rouser or fairground barker of old.


  2. @Davis58
    ‘Yes very good Angus, however if you turn your mind back to the early 80′s you might find there were as many rangers fans as Aberdeen.’
    ————————–

    Absolute garbage
    You seldom saw a Ranger top in thse days


  3. any of you FOI request wizards want to ask Strathclyde police to confirm the ACTUAL attendance last night

    I suggest you then forward it to the SFA, SFL, SPL, Motherwell and celeb Pie Munching Steelman Tam Cowan

    tickets were priced from £15 and £5 for juveniles (rules allow for a 75% adults/25% child split)

    BBC reporting the attendance at a tad over 29k

    So motherwell due at least £154,000 (based on allowing 15% of gate for costs of staging game and a 50/50 split after that)

    Various commentators said crowd was closer to 40k (meaning another £60k due to motherwell if true)

    So come on Strathclydes finest, please confirm teh ACTUAL number inside the ground. I don’t care if 11,000 of them had free tickets, money has to be paid on them!


  4. john clarke says:
    September 27, 2012 at 12:08

    However,it is my personal belief that, while anxiety about the financial viability of the SPL’s future ( in particular) was to some extent justified, the malign influence of that non-football-related nexus between Ibrox and the seats of power in the SFA/SPL ( a nexus that incidentally includes newspaper and BBC men as well as politicians) carried greater, but more insidious weight.

    No one -from the most inariculate and inefficient red-top scribe or radio pundit to the highest of blazers- who valued his career AND his personal social position was prepared to be seen to want the full rigour of the rules to be applied to Rangers FC as they ought to have been applied, and as they were not long ago applied to other, less ‘iconic’ clubs.

    Proof of that kind of thing is, of course, very hard to get-even if we had journalists of integrity who were prepared to try!

    And,as we all know, the MSM Scotland hack pack does not have any such when it comes to ‘Rangers’ -old or new.

    I don’t disagree with any of those points that Rangers have not been treated as any other club would have been, but that doesn’t mean there’s a conspiracy.

    I can quite understand the weakness in, say, Stuart Regan, when he realises he has a choice to make that would terminate Rangers as a footballing entity and decides he would rather not be the man who is known for ever as the one who killed them. On all kinds of levels, it would be a brave man who took that decision, especially if he and his family liked living and working in Scotland.

    Pursuing every other option first to try and avoid that outcome may not be the correct way to go about it and it may cause a whole host of other problems, but I find that much more likely than Regan being an accomplice in some sort of conspiracy to take it easy on Rangers for religious or ideological grounds.


  5. thebasharmilesteg says:

    September 27, 2012 at 10:09

    Just a point of information concerning the Nimmo-Smith inquiry and the pending FTT decision. While effectively they are both looking at the same evidence in order to determine whether certain payments were contractual or from third parties and in the FTT’s case subject to the appropriate taxes, they are following quite different rule sets.
    HMRC have already decided that the EBT payments were taxable and submitted a demand which the old Rangers challenged and appealed to the FTT. Nimmo-Smith’s job is to decide whether such payments represented a second, possibly undeclared contract and/or represented payment from a third party. Each body is required to look at the evidence in the light of the relevant rules; in the case of the FTT, this is tax law, while in the case of N-S it is SFA rules. It is quite conceivable that they will not agree. Also neither creates a precedent for the other. For instance, while HMRC’s ruling is that loans from an EBT equate to payment from an employer, N-S may decide that they constituted payment from a third party.
    The clue is in the name – First Tier Tribunal ie this is the lowest level of decision. As I stated, it creates no precedent and appeals to higher levels are not out of the question given the amounts of money involved. The tax business could run and run whoever wins in the FTT judgement. In our clamour over all things Rangers we are forgetting that the taxman has several prominent EPL clubs in his sights with presumably far larger amounts of back tax to mop up.
    =====================================================================

    thebasharmilesteg….absolutely spot on post in every way….I commend your clarity of thought to all bloggers here.

    From my limited (very) technical background in this area, I have been banging on for months now (or at least since 14 February 2012!) to my friends who support EPL teams that they should watch this case.

    Once Hector gets the nod from First/Upper TT(T), at whatever level, he will be coming after you…be afraid…be very afraid!

    PS…you are not JJ from RTC by any chance…?


  6. Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
    September 27, 2012 at 15:19

    any of you FOI request wizards want to ask Strathclyde police to confirm the ACTUAL attendance last night
    =======
    Strathclyde Police don’t have any way of knowing the actual attendance. Why would they? They might have a very rough estimate, but that’s all.


  7. Meanwhile, over on Twitter, RTC appears to have the bit between his teeth, and is pointing out a few home truths to the Sevcophantic Media and a few others


  8. neepheid says:
    September 27, 2012 at 15:35
    Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
    September 27, 2012 at 15:19

    any of you FOI request wizards want to ask Strathclyde police to confirm the ACTUAL attendance last night
    =======
    Strathclyde Police don’t have any way of knowing the actual attendance. Why would they? They might have a very rough estimate, but that’s all.

    —————————————

    they are required to confirm the attendance. The club are legally obliged to ensure the correct number of stewards and police for the event to meet council licensing and H&S requirements. The police are required to know the number of people inside the ground incase of serious incident.

    they DO have the numbers and I have seen them issue responses to FOI requests about attendances at celtic park in the past – usually confirming a lower number than was declared by Celtic, as Celtic always declared the number of seats sold as the attendance rather than the number of bodies inside the ground (i/e/ season ticket holders who didn’t attend were added)


  9. I agree that the conspiracy theory is too simple an explanation for these complex multiple behaviours across a number of organisations – the failure to act by so many in positions of authority is probably better explained by a combination of fear and self interest. Fear of the consequences for you and your family of making the difficult and unpopular decision and self interest in doing what is best for your own career, business, success, finances etc.

    For the avoidance of doubt, I am not justifying these behaviours but I think it’s too simple and glib to discount them as factors and seek conspiracies . E.g. 22 men play a football match and the home team wins (in front of a partisan crowd) and some seek conspiracies by way of explanation. Is it not good enough that 11 home players inspired by the challenge, fear of failure and the crowd overcame the away team who, by their own managers account, played poorly?

    Once the teams are on the park, it’s only a game….


  10. essexbeancounter says:
    September 27, 2012 at 15:33
    ————————–

    Thank you for the commendation Essex. Actualy I’m Don John from RTC and I’m not quite sure why my name has changed – however a Frank Herbert character who was super-human will do for me!


  11. Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
    September 27, 2012 at 15:41

    So where do the police get the numbers from? The only reasonably accurate figure comes from the turnstile totals. That information belongs to the club. Anything else is guesswork. Stewarding, policing etc is based on estimates by the club in advance. That’s all it can be based on. You might get a fairly accurate estimate from CCTV, if anyone could be bothered counting the empty seats. Even that assumes that everyone is sat down at the same time- unlikely, I would suggest.


  12. I too doubt a conspiracy per se – i.e. one that can be proven and was organised by a single person or entity, , but there clearly has been an astonishing coalescence of interests which has led to a whole variety of separate investigations all being delayed sufficiently to allow a new dispensation and complete rewriting of any concepts of football club, or of liquidation of such prior to the investigations reporting.
    Why the delay in the SPL enquiry from Match, the inexplicable delay in the FTT until now, Hodge’s report into the administration ( that’s a long two to three weeks ) the delay in strathclyde police investigation into the Whyte takeover. In short all a bitt too convenient for coincidence – so no formal conmspiracy just tacit inaction until such time as a future for Rangers ( despite being deid) could be organised.

    It stinks frankly!

    What happens next? No idea frankly. they could ride off into the sunset scoit free or die a second death by one of a multiplicity of routes.

    Great wee thriller actually!


  13. thebasharmilesteg says:

    September 27, 2012 at 15:53

    Rate This

    essexbeancounter says:
    September 27, 2012 at 15:33
    ————————–

    Thank you for the commendation Essex. Actualy I’m Don John from RTC and I’m not quite sure why my name has changed – however a Frank Herbert character who was super-human will do for me!
    =============================================================

    Don John…nice to know…keep up the good works/posts….!

    PS your nom de plume/strapline has got what little is left of my brain working overtime. Sadly, Frank Herbert is not an author Mrs EBC normally lets me read..!


  14. neepheid says:
    September 27, 2012 at 15:56
    Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
    September 27, 2012 at 15:41

    So where do the police get the numbers from? The only reasonably accurate figure comes from the turnstile totals. That information belongs to the club. Anything else is guesswork. Stewarding, policing etc is based on estimates by the club in advance. That’s all it can be based on. You might get a fairly accurate estimate from CCTV, if anyone could be bothered counting the empty seats. Even that assumes that everyone is sat down at the same time- unlikely, I would suggest.

    ————————————

    match commander has to verify the turnstyle count – the club HAVE to give that information or they won’t be getting police at the next game and license to host events will be withdrawn

    they KNOW how many people are inside the ground.


  15. iceman63 says:

    September 27, 2012 at 16:00

    I don’t believe there was a conspiracy. rather, that an unhealthlly close relationship developed over many years. This led people to a place where they thought that the interests of Rangers and the SFA were one and the same. Therefore, if you thought Rangers were doing something that might be a bit iffy, you could convince yourself that it ws in no-one’s interest to look into it. Sadly, of course, if some brave soul had pointed out at the start that someiting wasn’t quite right, there would have been a minor row, but RFC would have been saved from destruction.


  16. Night Terror says:
    September 27, 2012 at 15:22
    ‘…Pursuing every other option first to try and avoid that outcome may not be the correct way to go about it and it may cause a whole host of other problems, but I find that much more likely than Regan being an accomplice in some sort of conspiracy to take it easy on Rangers for religious or ideological grounds.’
    ——–
    I would go so far as to say that I have no fear that the judicial processes ( Lord Nimmo Smith’s Commission, Lord Hodge’s ,and the FTTT ) would be influenced by or party to ‘conspiracy’.

    I have the utmost faith in the professional integrity of those processes.

    And I would go a little bit further in acknowledging that the SFA and SPL seem, however reluctantly, to have accepted that getting ‘The Rangers FC Ltd’ into the SFA is about as far as they can go to help them.

    Once judicial processes are begun,there’s no way back.

    If ‘The Rangers FC Ltd’ are found guilty of failing to disclose all payments made under contract to their players,and the penalty is expulsion, The SFA will just have to grit its teeth and get on with it, and any ‘conspiracy’ that there might have been will die along with the club.
    .
    We will have to wait a little longer to find out

    But I really can’t shake off the opinion that there was a co-ordinated ( if botched) attempt by some people in various positions of influence to protect and save Rangers, at any cost to the truth ,because they share essentially the same mindset ( much more genteel and refined, of course, as befits directors and news editors and boat-owning hacks!) as the Bomber Browns.


  17. Frank Herbert is the author of the Dune novels, generally considered to be the most literate of all SF writers. Sadly, he died before the series was finished although the task was taken up and completed by his son. I re-read the original book on average about every 6 or 7 years it’s that good. Don’t be put off by the indifferent David Lynch film of 1985, there’s a much better SF Channel made for TV version featuring our own Alex Macavoy.

    (Apologies to TSFM for off-topic)


  18. Agents & EBT’s
    ==============
    Can’t remember if this was covered before, possibly on RTC way back ?

    Anyway, wrt Rae’s comments on SSB I agree – to some extent – that some players are only interested in what actually hits their bank accounts, and leave all those ‘boring financial/contract details stuff’ to their well paid parasite, I mean agent. 🙂

    So assuming the FTT decision is not good for Sevco Rangers, how does that leave the agents involved over this 10+ year EBT period ?

    I vaguely remember that FIFA introduced new rules several years ago in an attempt to regulate football agents. I think (?) they had to sit an exam, but more importantly had to lodge a USD100K bond with FIFA (?).

    Would agents involved with the EBT’s who are still in the business be liable to ;
    – being suspended or struck off
    – losing their bond
    – other punishments for facilitating the Rangers scam ?

    Smith – although maybe not currently registered as an agent (?) – could he in theory be struck off / banned for life ?

    Willie McKay I believe is still an agent (?), so could he potentially be facing further sanctions ?


  19. iceman63 says:
    September 27, 2012 at 16:00
    ‘….there clearly has been an astonishing coalescence of interests…’
    —–
    Wish I had said that!


  20. Menat to add, I think the reason that Traynor et al are so scathing of the decision to put matters in the hands of Nimmo Smith’s panel, is thet THEY know that LNS will not be swayed by anything other than the evidence. Sentiment, tradition, deference, tribal loyalties, even tabloid circulation figures, will have absolutely no effect.


  21. I’ve been surprised to see the initial fuss about the possible perception of anti-Rangers bias present in the three members of the panel has died away. Various prominent representatives of Rangers opinion seemed very definite on the conflict of interest and bias evident in the various lawyers’ past activities and associations.

    I wonder what happened there.


  22. Trying to make sense of the explanations / confusions to date. Consider;

    Clauses [3] to [7]; these come under `History`, that is chronologically explaining events and whom involved. It is more of a contextual narrative than considered definitions. These suffice to explain `history`.

    Clauses [31] to [47] come under `Jurisdiction` for the oldco and rfc respectively. The newco is acknowledged so there are three titled entities grouped in this sub-section. So these clauses must contain the authoritative definitions pertaining to jurisdiction – what this is about

    I think some of the confusion is coming from – and I`ll employ a silly example to demonstrate – of inappropriate juxtaposition. We can go to Row [5] in a supermarket and buy eggs – then to row [38] to get washing up liquid. It is possible we could mix the ingredients and create a fairy liquid omelette but it just wouldn’t make any sense. Ok so that’s ridiculous but so are some interpretations It’s possible inadvertent juxtaposition taken from different sub-sections within the Notes may cause ambiguity.

    Secondly the Premier Leagues depiction of “Owner and Operator” is a more modern reflection on the way major football clubs are professional run in a multi-million [Internationally Billions] Industry.

    The age of the family run big clubs is over. Moores @ Liverpool / ManU / Pre 94 CFC [just examples]

    The SFA definitions informing the formulation of rules serving from that time – may – need a refresher to align with the modern professional MO. The UEFA/FIFA definitions are informed by long established national associations so feasible they too could come under review. Certainly there needs to be alignment as the SFA and the SFL despite UEFA/FIFA quirks still require to conform to Civil Law.

    Unfortunately, the contradictions do seem to be creating divisive interpretations, exploited as we noted in the chaotic statement Monday. This was cherry-picking to order but not completely invalid.

    It may help to remain within Clauses [31] to [47] to form a clearer view – and get to the nub of this

    Certainly the argument postulated in Clause [46] is structurally correct as far as it goes but I can’t help but feel that a part of the final conclusions of rfc jurisdiction are contestable. The Commission conclusion is reliant on an interpretation of a SPL Rule A.7.1.1 definition that sanctions can be imposed [in future] “That power must continue to apply” on the separate identity of the Club going forward because of the past acts of a separate identity [oldco] – that will cease to be. Without getting into complications of cause and effect – that part of the Commission conclusion would be valid / correct if infringements were for say crowd control and such like – but penalising a non legal entity for financial impropriety by former directors? – That conclusion part – doesn’t sit well with the common view of thought and speech informing that entity.

    Just as important – It needs to be noted that Rule namely: A.7.1.1 states at the beginning “The Club is bound by all relevant rules” ………… However – “all relevant rules” – include automatic membership of the SFA for SPL members – and guess what also requires Clubs to conform to SFA membership and their rules definition. Again – the SFA is the `Parent` organisation – so a hierarchy of Interpretation Authority would / should favour the SFA/UEFA/FIFA. The SPL Commission – may – thus be challenged on their NoRs exact definition of their jurisdiction conclusions by the SFA on this and the paragraph above

    – so could this explain the SFA Statement Delay?


  23. iceman63 says:
    September 27, 2012 at 16:00
    I too doubt a conspiracy per se – i.e. one that can be proven and was organised by a single person or entity, , but there clearly has been an astonishing coalescence of interests which has led to a whole variety of separate investigations all being delayed sufficiently to allow a new dispensation and complete rewriting of any concepts of football club, or of liquidation of such prior to the investigations reporting.
    ———————————————————
    Not so much a conspiracy as a shared mind-set perhaps?


  24. Not The Huddle Malcontent says:

    September 27, 2012 at 15:19

    Re FOI – attendance, happy to oblidge.


  25. iceman63 says:
    September 27, 2012 at 16:00
    ‘….there clearly has been an astonishing coalescence of interests…’

    Indeed.

    If it became evident there was a real risk of Rangers disappearing for ever, a lot of people would see that as a threat to their profession and continued employment, whether they be journalists or football administrators.

    In terms of the money and interest Rangers represent in Scottish football, given the choice between Rangers existing or not, most would choose that they continue to exist I think, even amongst their rivals and enemies, never mind journos and football people. It seems to be in no-one’s financial interest that Rangers are entirely extinguished.

    The subtleties of how they would continue to exist under penalties or reduced means as a result of their past errors is probably beyond most gentlemen of the press, no doubt sided by some frank warnings by the Rangers people behind the scenes – it becomes a binary choice between Rangers – Yes or No.

    False choice or not, I believe that’s what it has come to, and there is a genuine fear that Rangers could be forced out of existence, and that this would have a real effect on peoples’ livelihood.

    In this circumstance, is it a conspiracy to, consciously or not, go easy on Rangers and help every other route to be examined?

    Have I just talked myself into it being a conspiracy now?


  26. In the event of the Independent Commission finding rangers guilty. Will the SFA have the cojones to uphold ANY sanctions meted out by LNS if rangers appeal.


  27. iceman63 says:
    September 27, 2012 at 16:00
    ————-

    “… any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result” is also a definition of ‘conspiracy’.


  28. How Campbell Ogilvie comes out of all of this may well have a bearing on whether conspiracy theorists are believed.

    I loved George Carlin’s take on those who are ‘really’ in charge in America. (Not the politicians. Voting is there to let the deluded feel that they have some say in the matter.)

    Anyway, Carlin says that there are no meetings, no emails, phone calls. Everyone knows what is expected of them. And all of them do what is expected of them.

    There certainly does seem to have been some sort of ‘telepathy’ going on between certain bodies in this Rangers saga.


  29. Lord Hodge, by the way, has a full schedule next week which, regrettably, does not include any D&P business, so no movement on that front.


  30. There has been so much mince spoken about the demise of Rangers/Sevco,journalists will have nothing to write about,administrators will have nothing to do,we need their money, and so on…..
    What rubbish,most of the people who have decided not to support the game would come back,they want fair play as do most of us.If that means the end for RFC(IA)/Sevco so be it.
    We are asked to condone what they have been doing (for a very long time) for financial reasons,before you answer,yes I mean condone,because if we accept what they have done then we are complicit.
    There have been quite a few posts trying to tell us to give them a chance,lets move on,get on with the football, NO.The only way forward from here is to punish whoever is left standing after the police enquiry,LNS,LH,FTT,disrepute charges,dual contracts,club/company rubbish.
    Football WILL survive in Scotland without RFC(IA) /Sevco,THERE IS NO CLUB BIGGER THAN THE GAME.
    They deserve to be Hammered,and I think they will be. Good.
    Rangers (IA) /Sevco gone, a threat to their profession?do you mean they would have to actually work for a living instead of living on PR handouts that they dont check for facts,wow. Thats the kind of journalism we dont need.
    By the way,every other route has been looked at,that’s the reason we are where we are,there are no more hiding places.Time to face the music,and they’re playing my tune.


  31. John Terry is not guilty by the laws of the land, but guilty by the footballing authorities.

    Do they have a differing definition of what racial abuse is?


  32. doontheslope says:
    September 27, 2012 at 17:55

    Or is that football people in England are saying more capable of saying

    “By the way Pal, dinae geez all that legal patter…yur at it!!”


  33. doontheslope says:

    September 27, 2012 at 17:55

    The difference her is between the concepts of beyond reasonable doubt, and the balance of probabilities. The posecution failed to meet the higher criminal standard, but easily met the lower civil standard.


  34. doontheslope says:
    September 27, 2012 at 17:55
    3 1 Rate This
    John Terry is not guilty by the laws of the land, but guilty by the footballing authorities.

    Do they have a differing definition of what racial abuse is?
    ==========
    No, but the burden of proof is different. In a criminal case, the prosecution have to establish your guilt beyond reasonable doubt. A civil court, and I guess the FA tribunal runs on Civil Court rules, comes to a decision on the balance of probabilities. There are plenty of cases where people are acquitted by a criminal court, but still found liable by a civil court. OJ Simpson springs to mind.


  35. Apologies if this has been covered before. Someone recently posted (below) one of the notes to the 2010 accounts and I’m puzzled about the “other service providers” bit. Given that EBTs were for directors/manager/players/other staff – i.e. all employees, who might these service provider people be? Surely not agents?

    And a note on the Staff Costs table (p.20):
    “The Murray Group Management Ltd. Remuneration Trust was established to provide incentives to certain employees and other service providers. Payments to the Trust are charged to the Group Profit and Loss Account in the year incurred. On the basis of expert tax advice, the Club is defending a query raised by HMRC into this Trust, which is part of an ongoing tax enquiry scheduled to be heard by a tax tribunal before the end of the year.”


  36. Scapa and Neep

    Every day a learning day. Thank you.


  37. Tic 6709 says:
    September 27, 2012 at 17:48

    There has been so much mince spoken about the demise of Rangers/Sevco,journalists will have nothing to write about,administrators will have nothing to do,we need their money, and so on…..

    What rubbish,most of the people who have decided not to support the game would come back,they want fair play as do most of us.If that means the end for RFC(IA)/Sevco so be it.
    We are asked to condone what they have been doing (for a very long time) for financial reasons,before you answer,yes I mean condone,because if we accept what they have done then we are complicit.

    There have been quite a few posts trying to tell us to give them a chance,lets move on,get on with the football, NO.The only way forward from here is to punish whoever is left standing after the police enquiry,LNS,LH,FTT,disrepute charges,dual contracts,club/company rubbish.
    Football WILL survive in Scotland without RFC(IA) /Sevco,THERE IS NO CLUB BIGGER THAN THE GAME.

    They deserve to be Hammered,and I think they will be. Good.
    Rangers (IA) /Sevco gone, a threat to their profession?do you mean they would have to actually work for a living instead of living on PR handouts that they dont check for facts,wow. Thats the kind of journalism we dont need.

    By the way,every other route has been looked at,that’s the reason we are where we are,there are no more hiding places.Time to face the music,and they’re playing my tune.

    I’m not sure who you think has been talking mince, but I’m going to assume you mean me for at least a couple of tasty spoonfuls.

    I wasn’t stating any of what you describe is right or should be accepted, I was just trying to understand why it has happened this way, prompted by John Clarke’s suggestion that there was some sort of conspiracy being deployed.


  38. john clarke says:

    September 27, 2012 at 17:38

    6

    0

    Rate This

    Lord Hodge, by the way, has a full schedule next week which, regrettably, does not include any D&P business, so no movement on that front.

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

    Why do I find that only moderately less surprising than looking out of my window now and thinking it’s getting dark.


  39. smartie1947 @ 18:58

    Everything about this fiasco seems to have been beset by inexplicable delays of one sort or other


  40. Can anyone help me.

    Not heard Ticketus mentioned much in recent times.

    How much, if any, of Rangers’ income this season will go to Ticketus?

    And what’s the chances of the MSM asking that question to either Charlie Green or Ticketus themselves?


  41. maybe we are mistaking lethergy for strategy……..

    Speaking of leathergy, still no statement from Hampden


  42. Scapaflow @19.11

    Statement from Hampden will appear at 16.59 tomorrow.
    Doors close 17.00
    Holiday Monday


  43. smartie1947 says:

    September 27, 2012 at 19:16

    Smartie, that gave me good chuckle, and you’re probably on the money!


  44. Night Terror, I did not mean you in particular,i just used you as an excuse,sorry.
    Had a God awful day, one of those where if I had been dive bombed by a Stuka I would not have been suprised ,had a rant.Feel better now.
    By the way,JC had a point,more than one actually,we cannot keep using semantics to cover up what has been happening,what is the difference between the favouritism shown to Rangers (IA) and corruption ?.I think you would have to admit it really is out of proportion.
    Anyway,must go back and try to fix the cooker if I want to have hot food tonight.
    Can hear a whistling sound, hope it’s not……..nah,could’nt be.


  45. Night Terror says:
    September 27, 2012 at 15:09

    I do think he has a point about ideology and there is evidence. Decades of failure to employ people of a certain religious persuasion, quite blatant masonic references/appeals in Press releases, Orange strips, honest mistakes, Donald Findlay’s choice of party piece, etc..

    Charles Green certainly recognises that if he doesnt pander to the more ideologically driven Rangers fan, whatever money there is will dry up.

    I still don’t see any of that having a bearing on how Rangers have been treated. It’s fun to imagine a scary conspiracy, but I doubt people in such positions of power are likely to risk their careers to help Rangers, or any other club, just because they have some links to religious/masonic/orangeism/DFQC.

    Positions of influence in society have been quite well infiltrated by people who do not at all share such inclinations and would not be so stupid as to be oblivious to such a conspiracy.

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

    I find it interesting that you use the word “infiltrated”, with the connotations that word involves. That there is something furtive or underhanded involved.

    Are you suggesting that the people concerned are not entitled to these positions, and that somehow they have managed to achieve posts they are not entitled to or should not rightfully be in.

    What particular “Positions of influence in society” are you talking about.


  46. Dawwell SSB at the very end teeth-gnashing angry wee man ……. Somebody slagging off his ‘team’ the wee guy is a total embarrassment to his ‘profession’ in denial

    SFA 78 hrs since announcement of statement. Doing well only 30 hrs late 😉 😉


  47. So for a quick recap on today’s blog:

    MSM are only lying because if Rangers die, they will lose their jobs. And the Masons no longer have any influence in Scottish society.


  48. Agrajag says:
    September 27, 2012 at 19:42
    Night Terror says:
    September 27, 2012 at 15:09

    Positions of influence in society have been quite well infiltrated by people who do not at all share such inclinations and would not be so stupid as to be oblivious to such a conspiracy…
    ========================

    Which is why I am still a wee bit surprised that there has been a distinct lack of ‘whistle-blowing’ from those directly involved or on the periphery of the scandal and ongoing discussions.

    Everyone for and against RFC/Sevco – for different reasons – seems to believe that there has been widespread corruption/collusion/victimisation/call it what you want displayed by the footballing authorities, MSM and some now suspect politicians and even the judiciary and HMRC itself.

    So if indeed at least some of these suspicions are true, then why has nobody anonymously leaked damaging information to support or shoot down certain allegations ?

    Or has information already been leaked but suppressed by the MSM ?

    There are so may suspicions swirling around in public, [on t’internet mostly], there is a real public interest in the RFC/Sevco story – and there is a growng number of people (?) who must know exactly what has been going on.

    Why has nobody blabbed yet [anonymously] – if only to protect their own personal/professional position ?


  49. Brenda says:
    September 27, 2012 at 20:07
    3 0 Rate This
    Dawwell SSB at the very end teeth-gnashing angry wee man …….
    Somebody slagging off his ‘team’ the wee guy is a total
    embarrassment to his ‘profession’ in denial
    SFA 78 hrs since announcement of statement. Doing well only 30 hrs late
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    I’m imagining you as Flo Capp. Dressing gown and baffies. Rollers in yer hair. A rolling pin in yer hand. Foot tapping furiously. 😀


  50. Lord Wobbly says:
    September 27, 2012 at 20:24
    Brenda says:
    September 27, 2012 at 20:07

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    I’m imagining you as Flo Capp. Dressing gown and baffies. Rollers in yer hair. A rolling pin in yer hand. Foot tapping furiously.
    ==========================

    Ooft, you’re on your own there LW !

    You could be the recipient of the first proper ‘online kicking’ on TSFM, from Brenda – unless she shows you some mercy… 😉


  51. StevieBC @ 20:21

    There are so may suspicions swirling around in public, [on t’internet mostly], there is a real public interest in the RFC/Sevco story – and there is a growng number of people (?) who must know exactly what has been going on.

    Why has nobody blabbed yet [anonymously] – if only to protect their own personal/professional position ?
    ========================================================================
    Those most likely to blab will in all probability be excluded from the inner circle, and would be unable to prove their allegations
    Without proof, everything collapses
    The people involved will have been kept to a minimum, and they will all have equally as much to lose by blabbing
    Ask yourself why Mr Hutton has never been hauled up for his accusations


  52. StevieBC says:
    September 27, 2012 at 20:29
    0 0 Rate This
    Lord Wobbly says:
    September 27, 2012 at 20:24
    Brenda says:
    September 27, 2012 at 20:07

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    I’m imagining you as Flo Capp. Dressing gown and baffies. Rollers
    in yer hair. A rolling pin in yer hand. Foot tapping furiously.
    ==========================
    Ooft, you’re on your own there LW !
    You could be the recipient of the first proper ‘online kicking’ on
    TSFM, from Brenda – unless she shows you some mercy…
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Some might suggest I am the embodiment of Andy, so mibbies I’ve got it coming. Only I don’t smoke, haven’t gambled in years and rarely drink.

    Ok, that last one is a bit of a fib. 😀


  53. Every process is being delayed, its happening so often that it appears that there is a reason for this.

    I think that one announcement will quickly be followed by another, then another. Bang bang bang bang, not much time for discussion or protest, and a joining together of the ruling bodies.

    All or most decisions will please one side of the divide or the other.

    Who is going to be satisfied.

    My money ( if the wife allows ), is on the good guys being happiest.


  54. campsiejoe says:
    September 27, 2012 at 20:33
    StevieBC @ 20:21

    Why has nobody blabbed yet [anonymously] – if only to protect their own personal/professional position ?
    ========================================================================

    The people involved will have been kept to a minimum, and they will all have equally as much to lose by blabbing
    Ask yourself why Mr Hutton has never been hauled up for his accusations
    ==========================================================
    Agreed that Hutton should have been carpeted, but wasn’t for what we believe to be ‘obvious reasons’.

    But I still think that as the whole RFC/Sevco debacle has been rumbling along for so long now, it would be increasingly difficult to contain all the incriminating evidence to just a select few individuals. Surely someone has been asked to photocopy something, overhead a conversation, obtained a ‘blind copy’ of an email etc…

    The longer it continues, IMHO, the more difficult it is to contain the information – especially when there are ongoing discussions in a fairly fluid situation such as RFC/Sevco has been over the last 6 months+.


  55. Some interesting tweets

    Harry Brady ‏@HarryBradyCU
    1) Stadium Sale and leaseback 2) Securitise season books 3) Resi on Murray Park Yes, within the week i’ll reveal Greene finance plans

    Harry Brady ‏@HarryBradyCU
    @ShaunGibson1967 @StevenOliver74 i have had this detail for some time, securitisation and quiet ticketus make me think they’re involved


  56. Lord Wobbly
    LOL. I’m not like that but probably create that image at times, still laughing ……StevieBC you really have the wrong idea about me 😉 I have too much respect for most of the posters on here to give out any ‘online kickings’ brilliant boys you’ve cheered me up no end 🙂 🙂 🙂

    You’ve even made me lose count of how many hours late the SFA statement is!!! Cheers 🙂


  57. Tic 6709 says:
    September 27, 2012 at 19:29

    …..we cannot keep using semantics to cover up what has been happening,what is the difference between the favouritism shown to Rangers (IA) and corruption ?

    I have been thinking this for some time. There is a campaign for plain English usage. Let us call a spade a …. shovel!!!


  58. StevieBC @ 20:58

    Normally I would agree with you, but in my opinion the main players in this know just how compromised they would be should the dam break
    They were able to contain the damage that should have come from the Regan email, via their allies in the MSM, so what chance would someone not involved at the highest level have of getting the story out, and be able to prove it
    The truth will only come out when someone from within the cabal decides to break cover, complete with the evidence


  59. Stevi BC@ 20.58. (edit) I still think that as the whole RFC/Sevco debacle has been rumbling along for so long now, it would be increasingly difficult to contain all the incriminating evidence to just a select few individuals. Surely someone has been asked to photocopy something, overhead a conversation, obtained a ‘blind copy’ of an email etc….
    ======================
    Stevie,I think that has already been happening,Thomson said on more than one occasion that ‘his contact at SFA’ told him this or that.Also if you remember when LNS went in to investigate Whyte about ‘fit and proper’ the news came out about Bain and his affair with the shredder,Ogilvie’s letter appeared stating the duties of a non executive director (got a laugh reading that.)So there has been a trickle, not a flood,but I think there will be a lot more as the realization hits that heads are going to roll.There wont be a lot of room left in the lifeboat.


  60. Any financial heads on here explain to me how the German pricing model works for games, and could it be implemented here? Common sense would say no as the population is too small. The pricing in this country is a disgrace worthy of being up there with EBT’s etc. The level of expense can’t be maintained for long before fan’s get fed up of a declining product, with an ever rising price! The bubble will burst at some point and the SFA/SPL/SFL like Captain Schettino are steering towards it like a baboom chuging away in the captains seat blissfully unaware’s. Seem’s every night on SSB etc it sort of get’s discussed but with no real fact’s & figure’s, if anybody’s got any info paste us a link etc. Just so I can have a wee nosey and get jealous of how well run other assoiciation’s are.;


  61. s.f.a annoncement tomorrow after the ryder cup starts ANY BETS


  62. jean7brodie says:

    September 27, 2012 at 21:06

    Rate This

    Tic 6709 says:
    September 27, 2012 at 19:29

    …..we cannot keep using semantics to cover up what has been happening,what is the difference between the favouritism shown to Rangers (IA) and corruption ?

    I have been thinking this for some time. There is a campaign for plain English usage. Let us call a spade a …. shovel!!!
    ===============================
    Thanks,I was really needing a laugh. Cheers.


  63. Sorry I have nothing much to contribute, so I hope people do not mind me posting tweets that I find interesting.

    Phil MacGiollaBhain ‏@Pmacgiollabhain
    Why would the European Clubs Assoc be investigating the status of Sevco/Rangers’ membership of that top flight body? Hmmmm


  64. For the last 48 hours (Brenda!) I’ve been trying to get my head around the delay of SFA statement.

    Okay, Green’s statement obviously brought about the delay.

    How did Green know what to say?

    Anyone?

    Bueler?

    Ogilvie?


  65. Lord Wobbly says:
    September 27, 2012 at 20:24
    12 1 i
    Rate This
    Brenda says:
    September 27, 2012 at 20:07
    3 0 Rate This
    Dawwell SSB at the very end teeth-gnashing angry wee man …….
    Somebody slagging off his ‘team’ the wee guy is a total
    embarrassment to his ‘profession’ in denial
    SFA 78 hrs since announcement of statement. Doing well only 30 hrs late
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    I’m imagining you as Flo Capp. Dressing gown and baffies. Rollers in yer hair. A rolling pin in yer hand. Foot tapping furiously.
    =====================================================================

    Your Lordship…utterly sexist…but pure dead brilliant!

    PS you are not the late Mr Smythe…in resurrected form…nah…cannae be…!


  66. Well well well
    Some news from the Spivs
    Whyte’s Liberty Corporate applied to be liquidated on 25 Sept 2012 (See notice at Companies House)
    That’s interesting because………
    Liberty Corporate holds a floating charge over the assets of Whyte’s RFCG. It is wholly owned by Whyte’s BVI co Liberty Capital
    RFCG hold a £27.5M floating charge over the Ibrox and MP assets of RFC (I.A.)
    So
    In the world of Spivery the liquidation of Liberty Corporate has only one meaning
    It means Craig Whyte’s floating charge over RFC(IA) is alive and well and getting ready to move somewhere even safer than Liberty Corporate
    And
    If Craig Whyte’s floating charge over RFC (IA) assets is alive and well the one place it will certainly not be at present is in the RFC(IA) List of Creditors where the departure of assets makes it worthless.
    Meaning
    The RFCG floating charge must have ceased being an RFC (IA) debt as part of the deal under which Sevco 5088 acquired the assets of RFC (IA) for £5.5m
    The $64 question now is:
    Which Co now holds the RFCG floating charge?
    It has not been registered as an fc charge against either Sevco5088 or Sevco Scotland.
    So where is it?
    The answer I reckon lies in the structure of the Sale Agreement
    Under this agreement a company called “Sevco” were committed to buy certain assets if the CVA sale to Sevco 5088 was rejected by Creditors People thought that “Sevco” and Sevco5088 were the same company.
    This sale duly took place. The title deeds for Ibrox and MP assets were transferred from RFC (IA) to separate legal entity, Sevco Scotland apparently without passing through the books of Sevco 5088. If they had passed through the books of Sevco 5088 then Sevco5088 would have been obliged to register any floating charges that moved with these assets. This did not happen.
    We know the Scottish Sports Council had a floating charge over MP and were a Creditor of RFC (IA). On 6 July 2012 Sevco Scotland registered this SSC floating charge at Companies House. This suggested it was legal for a floating charge to be reassigned from RFC (IA) direct to Sevco Scotland without passing through Sevco 5088 books and thus having to be registered by Sevco5088
    So if it was legal to assign the SSC floating charge to an independent legal entity Sevco Scotland then it was equally possible to reassign the RFCG floating charge to yet another independent legal entity
    Here’s what may have happened
    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
    Assume that both Sevco5088 and Sevco Scotland are owned by a parent company called Sevco plc. which is registered offshore (perhaps in the BVI where Liberty Capital is registered)
    Sevco as parent co of Sevco5088 is also legally entitled to buy RFC (IA) assets for £5.5m This seems a bargain price particularly since it will be reduced by £2.75m if players refuse to be transferred for a fee. Since this happened in practice the real purchase price was probably around £2.75m
    Sevco plc. was able to acquire these assets for a bargain £2.75m because it accepted responsibility for a Ticketus contract and 3 floating charge debts owed to RFCG, Close Leasing and the Scottish Sports Council
    So
    D&P are instructed that everything bought from RFC (IA) by Sevco 5088 is to be transferred from RFC (IA) to Sevco plc. This allows Sevco5088 to drop out of the picture altogether. We thus move from a scenario where RFC (IA) assets are being sold to a UK Co (Sevco5088) to one where RFC (IA) assets are being sold to an offshore co (Sevco plc.)
    Sevco plc. then transfers the SSC floating charge plus Ibrox and MP to its subsidiary co Sevco Scotland. This means Sevco Scotland owes its parent co big bucks for these valuable assets
    Sevco plc. retains the Ticketus contract together with the RFCG and Close Leasing floating charges. over Ibrox and MP. As an offshore co Sevco plc. Is not obliged to register the RFCG and Close Leasing floating charges at Companies House.
    By taking on these floating charges Sevco plc. have to pay Whyte £27.5m (or whatever lower figure they agree) to cancel the FC .Similarly , Sevco plc. have to pay Close Leasing to cancel their FC
    We thus end up with the following situation
    Sevco Scotland owe their parent co for the value of the assets transferred (perhaps the £50m recently quoted by a Sevco Scotland Director)
    Sevco plc. owe CW some agreed figure to cancel out his floating charge
    Sevco plc. owe Ticketus the right to sell £27m of STs over the next few years
    A share issue takes place which enables Sevco Scotland to reduce its debt to parent co Sevco plc.
    Sevco plc. Then pay off Close Leasing and RFCG with some of the fund raising proceeds
    Ticketus get a staged payment on their £27m debt as their share of the fund raising
    Everybody lives happily ever after
    Apart from TRFC the “football club” which is stuck with debt owed to its parent co Sevco plc. and a Ticketus deal that will last for years
    Plus of course
    Any fans who think that by investing in the fundraising they will be getting better quality players on the park


  67. nowoldandgrumpy says:
    September 27, 2012 at 21:02

    Some interesting tweets

    Harry Brady ‏@HarryBradyCU
    1) Stadium Sale and leaseback 2) Securitise season books 3) Resi on Murray Park Yes, within the week i’ll reveal Greene finance plans

    Harry Brady ‏@HarryBradyCU
    @ShaunGibson1967 @StevenOliver74 i have had this detail for some time, securitisation and quiet ticketus make me think they’re involved
    =======================================================================
    So CG will sell Ibrox,thereby raising capital short term but will lease it back to allow T’Rangers to continue.That allows him to ring fence the ST money to repay Ticketus.Sell Murray Park and he’s quids in,and still owns the club.
    If the SFA expel T’Rangers,he’s already got the cash from the asset sales.The only thing he loses is the club and that’s loss making anyway.
    Whoever buys the stadium(obviously someone known to Green)can just demolish and re-develop the site.If CG is telling the truth,and he normally does!,then the problem of the Edmiston club has been dealt with also.
    Green and his pals get everything.The club,and or its legal entity 😆 may die but that’s neither here nor there.
    Funnily enough,a wee bird told me tonight that they’ve heard that possibly,by the end of next week,a story will break that’ll have Sevco fans wailing with much gnashing of teeth.
    Don’t know if their info is related to these tweets though.
    We’ll see.


  68. goosygoosy says:
    September 27, 2012 at 21:53
    Well well well
    Some news from the Spivs…
    =======================

    Quality post goosy !

    Do we still do ‘chapeau’ ? If so, worth a couple of hats… 🙂

Comments are closed.