Naming the Rose

ByTrisidium

Naming the Rose

We spend an inordinate amount of time on this blog arguing about what the re-emergent Rangers should be called. It is a rather circular debate with no way of finding any consensus. The dispute between Rangers (“The Rangerists”) or The Rangers or Sevco (“The Sevconians”) and its claim to be the club that was formed in the 19th century is spurious. Whichever way you look at it, the continuity of the “brand” is undeniable and as long those who wish to keep buying that package are satisfied that the wrapping is authentic – where’s the harm?

The red herring in the argument is that “history” is important. To the average football fan, it is nothing of the kind. As a Celtic fan myself, and a bit of a student of the history of the club, I am constantly dismayed by the Thousand Yard Stare I get from your average Celtic fan who is confronted with the names of people who contributed significantly to the club’s identity. Key figures like Sandy McMahon, Jimmy Delaney, Jimmy McGrory and (God help us) John Thomson rarely elicit recognition.

Modern football fans who live in the instant gratification society of the the WWW and mobile communications may pay lip service to their clubs’ history, but that’s not what gives the modern football fan wears as his badge of honour. That is a commodity often erroneously confused with history – the bragging rights associated with the trophy haul.

The ability to claim that “we have more titles than you” is far more valuable to a supporter than which 19th century attacking centre-back won the Scottish Cup with a last minute header; and the value of said cup wins is heavily weighted in favour of the most recent (save for the honourable exception of the European successes).

The maintenance of that illusion of superiority is crucial if Rangers fans are to believe that their club is still Rangers. Perhaps in time they may even come to fully believe it themselves, but the cataract of column inches devoted to propagating that myth, both from the MSM and from information outlets controlled by Charles Green’s organisation, betrays a lack of total belief by the chief Bear-existentialists. Protesting too much may not be subtle, but that never put off your average fitba’ man either.

The upshot though is this. There is a belief – or at least a hope – amongst Rangerists that the continuity argument holds. They will call the new club Rangers. Fans of other clubs who make up the vast majority of the Sevconian tendency, believe nothing of the kind. They will call it something else.

Many will remind Rangerists that the old club died, and this is factually correct (or at least will be very soon). Rangerists will counter that the Rangers ethos lives on at Ibrox, and despite the worrying overtones (for some) contained in that statement, that is also factually correct.

Rangerists will also point out, as Rangers fans on this blog already have, that the SPL bent over backwards to assist the continuity of the club in order to minimise the financial consequences for Scottish football, and that the SFL too, have agreed that they are the same club.

Why? Simply because Scottish Football thinks it needs to help perpetrate they illusion of continuity to avoid the loss of thousands of paying customers to the game altogether.

So round one has gone to the Rangerists, with the Sevconians pretty much taking an eight-count.

So is the name thing important? I don’t think it is of critical importance. The name in itself doesn’t matter, but to merely agree that everything is as before is to join forces with the MSM, SFA & SPL who have sought to give RFC and their tax theft a pass.

Whatever happens in the future though, the illusion hasn’t worked completely. The Sevconians’ wish to call the new club by a different name was for the purpose of making it synonymous with tax evasion, however the name Rangers now evokes exactly that response. There is now a discernible pause when people mention Rangers. A pause that reflects on the dis-service they did to the country, and to the game of football in Scotland.

Which brings us to the really important point. Throughout this saga rules have been bent. Conflicted individuals, alleged to have been involved in the tax and registration scam and its subsequent cover-up, have remained in positions of authority and power, despite being under a cloud throughout. The media have been complicit, except in rare cases, in allowing the wrong-doing to go unquestioned, actively campaigning for rules not to be applied.

What we have been saying all along is this. Please play the game by the rules, and do not manufacture special cases for the financially powerful.

Call Rangers whatever you wish, but deal with their transgressions appropriately in the spirit of sporting fairness, and within the framework of the existing rules. That is the least – and most – we expect. We don’t ask for much. Just give us back some pride in our sport .

About the author

Trisidium administrator

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

2,065 Comments so far

jonnyodPosted on8:35 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Did CW just tell everyone that whilst ragers were 10 pts ahead in the SPL in Oct ,he informed the SPL that they were bust and the SPL made a deal with him .In fact it was a positive meeting in his words .
Did ragers fc receive 2.9m for 2nd place prize money from the SPL last season when the SPL knew from Oct that he was financing the club with tax payers money

View Comment

jean7brodiePosted on8:35 pm - Oct 17, 2012


bangordub says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 19:31

I have noticed CW’s inappropriate eye contact- too much/ too little- since he first appeared on our screens. Very worrying.

View Comment

AgrajagPosted on8:35 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Craig Whyte said in a televised interview that he had spent PAYE and VAT (of £14m) because he needed it to to run the business.

The only other options were to stop playing wages, and suppliers, or go into administration.

Wow just wow.

“I stole millions of pounds from the citizens of the UK to run a football club”.

That’s OK then, half-wit.

View Comment

Parson St. BhoyPosted on8:38 pm - Oct 17, 2012


taxlawplebeian says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 20:18
“”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””

That’s what I heard.

View Comment

jonnyodPosted on8:39 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Did the SPL/SFA knowingly allow a member club to trade insolvently till Feb and let them field players they could not afford allowing them to finish higher up the league than member clubs that were paying their bills/taxes

View Comment

taxlawplebeianPosted on8:40 pm - Oct 17, 2012


john clarke says:

Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 20:25

taxlawplebeian says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 20:18
—-
Yes, you heard it. But it was I think, a historical reference to the situation as Whyte was taking over. Not to the FTTT decision!!
It had me going for a second or two as well.

_______________________________________________________________

He links that statement with going down to 3rd div & recent on-field troubles, I’m not so sure he is using a historical reference.

It could be wishful thinking on my part

View Comment

jonnyodPosted on8:42 pm - Oct 17, 2012


CW stated it was either use the taxpayers money to finance the club or fail to pay the players wages and put the club into admin ,That alone should have saw them facing a suspension

View Comment

bangordubPosted on8:43 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Rangers Tax-Case ‏@rangerstaxcase
Watch the Whyte interview again and note the blink frequency when Craigy is being less than truthful. It is pretty obvious. 🙂
Expand Reply Retweet Favorite

Ah It’s good when Mr RTC sees what I saw. Luvvin it tonight. Jean, you are correct, sinister is the word that comes to mind

View Comment

exfallhoose2012Posted on8:43 pm - Oct 17, 2012


And so Football has managed to find itself featured in the In The City pages of Private Eye ….again. It is all about a football team who used dodgy people with dodgy money, people who did not produce accounts, whose parents company produced accounts with ‘redacted’ sections and unexplained payments. BDO are involved. The club is B’ham City. It couldn’t happen in Scotland!

View Comment

Reilly1926Posted on8:44 pm - Oct 17, 2012


killiemad says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 19:31

CW on Radio Scotland: QThe old board were taking insolvency advice.”

Does this tally with anything Alistair Johnston has said? What about the oft-repeated line “The debt was opnly £18million, it was manageable?”

===========
The plan by Murray, MBB and Mr Charles was never to pay HMRC a thin Dime. Murray could have sold players during his time at RFC to pay off the tax debt. Instead he continued to spend.

Chris McLaughlin’s interview tonight was better than I expected him to do but he failed to get MBB to admit that the reason he didn’t pay any PAYE/NIC was that, well what was the point ? Better to get hung for a sheep than a lamb.

I’m a bit puzzled by MBB’s decision to come out at this particular time. My suspiscion is that it may be a deflection tactict away from something a lot more serious going on.

View Comment

calumcrofterPosted on8:44 pm - Oct 17, 2012


WRT to my post at 18.22.
I’ve since watched, and thoroughly enjoyed, the BBC interview with CW and will be buying a particular tabloid newspaper tomorrow. It’s treatment of CW’s claim that, in effect, his “off the radar” wealth was it’s invention should be interesting. Will it call Craig a liar and elaborate? Will it assure its readers that its philosophy is good journalism that examines fact and passes that on to its readers?

Meantime – croftwork is never done – I’m off to the byre to check on the cows before the milking in the morning. I will be back in before Newsnight and hope to be further educated on the proposals to milk sheep.Were they, not that long ago, succulent lambs?

View Comment

torrejohnbhoyPosted on8:45 pm - Oct 17, 2012


readcelt says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 19:02

Not to burst any bubbles but why believe Whyte now when he has lied time and again?

More questions to ask?
==================================================================
Certainly,
Even if half the lies he’s telling aren’t true,they must ensure a reaction from D&D ,Green etc.Then we can see both sets of lies and decide who we want to believe.
The more they lie,the deeper the hole they’ll end up in.

View Comment

twopandaPosted on8:46 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Ok

Chris McL had a wee chequered history on this one – but sterling achievement today nonetheless

LBG needs to make a statement
SDM needs to make a statement
CW needs to explain what compensation he received – and from who

Holding on stv at the mo – they`ve surprised me by consistent detail accuracy and stepping up many times over the past few months when others hid. To me a real test now when the chips are down. I`ll watch the stv treatment with interest. If something goes awry here at this juncture then it’s on higher instruction – to me. I`m hoping many months good reference work not shipwrecked. We`ll see.

How jabber and the rest plays this going forward is a wee litmus test. Content that lot are exposed as a side show tho really. They should stick to nova nachos 2 day agonising tattoos.

CW stuff will be proved or disproved over time. D+P have work to do – afraid I`ll be hard to convince.

View Comment

jean7brodiePosted on8:49 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Should have qualified my post, not doubtful about the outcome of all this, worried about the ability/capability/state of mind of the man.

View Comment

readceltPosted on8:51 pm - Oct 17, 2012


I’ve watched CSI and lie to me enough times to know if you look left, you are lying.

Unless Mr Whyte is left handed of course. In which case…..

View Comment

jean7brodiePosted on8:52 pm - Oct 17, 2012


readcelt says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 20:51

He’s sinister!!!

View Comment

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on8:55 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Speaking exclusively to BBC Scotland’s Chris McLaughlin, Whyte said he had played a key role in the sale.

“I was the one who found a buyer – it wasn’t Duff and Phelps,” he said.

“My colleagues in London – when no credible buyer was coming forward – went out and used our contacts in the city to find… to put a suitable deal together.”

When asked if he was the one who had brought Mr Green to the table, Whyte answered: “Absolutely. I introduced them to Duff and Phelps.”

—————————————————————————-

when no credible buyer was forthcoming – doesn’t really tie in with Zeus being approached in FEBRUARY.

At what point is CW suggesting his “people” in london went and found whyte – Feb? BEFORE feb? or april/may once D&P are in place

Either whyte is lying completely….or he is partially lying and that green/zeus was the plan from the day D&P were in place

View Comment

readceltPosted on8:57 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Seriously, the amount of left looks before answering a question. Thats a sign that you are not using memory but your imagination.

Did David Murray know you were using season tickets to fund the purchase?

Shift look left, then answers no.

View Comment

abcottPosted on8:58 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Whyte was careful not to say what he made from his deal. But his response made it clear he had received something.
Am I right to assume that what he got must have been purely salary during his time at the club? If not, what else?

View Comment

AgrajagPosted on8:58 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Rangers Tax-Case ‏@rangerstaxcase
Salmond’s efforts to intercede with Dave Hartnett (HMRC top boy) met with blunt words to the effect of “mind your own business”.

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

As we have discussed before.

Taxation is not a devolved issue, HMRC are non-ministerial, and they are a reserved body.

Craigy saying that senior politicians trying to influence them, and even naming Salmond was just nonsensical name dropping.

View Comment

nowoldandgrumpyPosted on9:03 pm - Oct 17, 2012


john clarke says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 20:25
2 0 Rate This
taxlawplebeian says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 20:18
—-
Yes, you heard it. But it was I think, a historical reference to the situation as Whyte was taking over. Not to the FTTT decision!!
It had me going for a second or two as well.
=================

Not sure, but I thought it was in reference to their current state,
“recently RECEIVED the tax bill, it finds itself in the 3rd division”. I thought he would have said “they had received the tax bill” or “receives the tax bill”, if he was talking or describing a past event.

View Comment

Long Time LurkerPosted on9:03 pm - Oct 17, 2012


I was surprised that Jim Traynor was not on Sportssound this evening. Is this the first sign of the changing of the guard?

View Comment

AgrajagPosted on9:07 pm - Oct 17, 2012


And also

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/first-minister-alex-salmond-denies-1129278

ALEX SALMOND has denied lobbying the taxman on behalf of former Rangers FC owner Sir David Murray.

Labour MSP Michael McMahon said Alex Salmond “was quick to call HM Revenue and Customs for his friend Sir David Murray” and urged him to show the same courtesy to Scottish Gas workers facing redundancy.

Mr Salmond said the claim “is totally untrue” and accused Mr McMahon of putting “the political battle” before the interests of his constituents.

A Labour spokesman said Mr McMahon is standing by his statement. He said it relates to allegations made by Channel 4 News that “several Scottish MSPs and First Minister Alex Salmond” have questions to answer “about their blatant political interference with the HMRC”.

It was alleged that MSPs were “blatantly and publicly attempting to pressure the taxman away from any liquidation” of Rangers.

The club finally entered liquidation this week after HMRC rejected an offer of a company voluntary arrangement to settle unpaid tax debts.

Speaking at First Minister’s Questions, Mr McMahon said: “On Tuesday of this week Scottish Gas announced 135 job losses at its call centre and support facility in Uddingston. The GMB and Unison (union) officials there are concerned that the work is to be transferred within the company but to a facility with poorer pay and conditions.

“The First Minister was quick to call HMRC for his friend Sir David Murray. He couldn’t wait to make a call to Jeremy Hunt for his friend Sir Rupert. Are 135 Scottish Gas employees in Uddingston worthy of a phone call, or does fighting for Scottish jobs only apply if he has a statutory responsibility to some and not others?”

Mr Salmond said: “Well, can I just point out that the remark about Sir David Murray is totally untrue. Now, I’m used to Michael McMahon and other people saying things that are less than factually accurate about myself and the SNP, but to say something about somebody who is not in this chamber, and therefore has no ability to defend themselves, in my view, at least put on the record that the remark concerning Sir David Murray was totally and utterly untrue. And that remark should go in the record.

“Now if I can turn to what I think was the substance of what was meant to be a constituency question about jobs. Is Michael McMahon so caught up in the political battle that he can’t do the essential duty of every member of parliament to represent his constituents as best he possibly can?

“Yes I am aware, and will be talking to the unions and to the company to see what can be done for his constituents, because we put the interests of his constituents first even if his remarks put that into doubt.”

A spokesman for the First Minister said afterwards: “This is a serious error of judgment by the Labour party and Mr McMahon. Their claims are demonstrably false and they have not grasped a fundamental point: Sir David Murray sold his controlling interest of shares in Rangers in May 2011 and the First Minister’s telephone conversation with HMRC was on 11 January 2012.

“The Scottish Government has a clear locus in the situation, including the preservation of jobs and impact on the local economy and other clubs, the health of the national game in Scotland and the fact that Ibrox stadium is a 2014 Commonwealth Games venue.”

In a later statement, Mr McMahon said: “I stand by my comments and Alex Salmond knows they are true, as his response showed how much the truth gets under his skin.

“The First Minister has shown in the past that he is happy to come running to the aid of his bigwig friends when they are in trouble. For example, the way he tried to pressurise HMRC to apply special treatment in the wake of the damage caused to Rangers by his pal Sir David Murray.

“Well, the 130 workers at Scottish Gas in my constituency only want the same treatment afforded to Mr Salmond’s friends.”

View Comment

corsicacharityPosted on9:08 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Does anyone else find it interesting that our hero states that “D&P” knew about the Ticketus deal whereas Paul Clark of D&P states “the administrators” knew nothing? Key point here is that D&P are not the administrators, that being Clark and Whitehouse personally.

View Comment

Long Time LurkerPosted on9:09 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Remember Mark Daley questioned Gordon Smith’s assertion that no one at RFC knew that CW had not paid PAYE to HMRC?

Interesting statement from CW tonight, that it was no secret within the club, daily fax exchanges between HMRC and RFC over the non-payment of tax issue, all senior members of the club’s management would have been aware.

View Comment

obonfanti88 (@obonfanti88)Posted on9:09 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Long Time Lurker says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 21:03

Nah Jabba was probably busy preparing his latest propaganda piece for Murray and Johnstone for tomorrow’s Record.

View Comment

readceltPosted on9:12 pm - Oct 17, 2012


You brought charles green and his consortium together?

Shifty look left ‘absolutely, I introduced them to duff and phelps’

View Comment

Long Time LurkerPosted on9:13 pm - Oct 17, 2012


obonfanti88 (@obonfanti88) says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 21:09

What possible scoop could the DR have tomorrow?

View Comment

Long Time LurkerPosted on9:16 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Interesting set of tweets from RTC on the attempt by Alex Salmond to secure assistance from HMRC.

UEFA/FIFA don’t like governmental interference in football affairs do they?

View Comment

readceltPosted on9:17 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Seriously, either Craig Whyte is left handed or he is telling some amount of porky pies.

View Comment

rabPosted on9:18 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Did Topping and Doncastor tell any other SPL board members about impending insolvency at rfc.

Did they tell anyone at the SFA, if so, who. Why did the SFA allow rfc to enter the Scottish Cup.

Was Gordon Smith senior level enough to have been in the know about the witholding of PAYE. Was ally aware of this.

What pressures did Salmond abysmally fail to apply to HMRC.

Why is there at least 2 jumps in the interview, was there some stuff the lawyers wouldn’t allow. Or is it for Marc Daly part 3.

And loads more questions.

Cant wait for chuckie on stv and then newsnicht the nicht, and then the response from all the parties that the googly one implicated.

Oh lordy, what a hoot.

View Comment

nowoldandgrumpyPosted on9:23 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Long Time Lurker says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 21:13
2 0 Rate This
obonfanti88 (@obonfanti88) says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 21:09

What possible scoop could the DR have tomorrow?
===========

CW was not a billionaire perhaps?

View Comment

Long Time LurkerPosted on9:30 pm - Oct 17, 2012


CW made 2 senior officer appointments, Ali Russell, Chief Operating Officer and Gordon Smith, Director of Football,

I cannot see how the Chief Operating Officer was not aware of the HMRC paye issues – especially as CW was not at Ibrox everyday, and the daily fax messages would have had to have been directed to a senior officer?

While CW may not have informed Gordon Smith personally, I cannot see that Ali Russell kept the non payment of taxes issue along with there is no money left issues to himself. Indeed what would he have said to Gordon, when Gordon asked for money to strengthen the Club?

More likely than not, Gordon Smith must have known there was cash issues and that bills including paye were not being made.

View Comment

jean7brodiePosted on9:34 pm - Oct 17, 2012


readcelt says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 21:17

I don’t think he is just left handed. I think it is more than that. He has serious communication difficulties, rigidity of thought and is struggling socially .

View Comment

bangordubPosted on9:35 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Stunney, where are you ?

View Comment

valentinesclownPosted on9:36 pm - Oct 17, 2012


nowoldandgrumpy says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 21:23
4 0 Rate This
Long Time Lurker says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 21:13
2 0 Rate This
obonfanti88 (@obonfanti88) says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 21:09

What possible scoop could the DR have tomorrow?
===========

CW was not a billionaire perhaps?

____________________________________________________________________________

Former billionaire to train driver.

View Comment

pau1mart1nPosted on9:38 pm - Oct 17, 2012


What possible scoop could the DR have tomorrow?

extra large double chocolate chip for jim.

View Comment

rabPosted on9:39 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Rangers registered Aluko and Celik in November 2011 and January 2012 respectively, both after the SPL knew about impending insolvency.

View Comment

corsicacharityPosted on9:41 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Regarding who knew what…corsica’s information was that everybody senior inside Ibrox knew what was going on regarding the finance situation. McLelland and Greig were kept in the dark however and resigned when they found out. Corsica’s information was that Greig approached Smith to ask why a long-time supplier had not been paid (they having complained to him) and was told it was now company policy in order to manage cashflow. When Grieg approached Whyte about the matter, he was told to mind his own business and it was this which triggered both his and Mclelland’s resignations.

View Comment

paulmac2Posted on9:43 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Is this the same Craig Whyte who was taking legal action against the BBC now giving them interviews?

Whod-a-thunk it?

View Comment

wottpiPosted on9:46 pm - Oct 17, 2012


I think I know what to do in these situations were you have a load of disfunctional freeloaders living of the state and pissing other people’s monies up against the wall. While at the same time continually having relationship issues, fall outs and publicly casting aspersions back and forth about each other.

You go for a lie detector test on the Jeremy Kyle Show!!

View Comment

angus1983Posted on9:47 pm - Oct 17, 2012


“GodsaveCharlesGreen” on RM just now:

“Due dilligence being done on all potential share holders.In other words weeding out the scum.CG ssn 9.35pm”

View Comment

torrejohnbhoyPosted on9:49 pm - Oct 17, 2012


corsicacharity says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 21:41

Regarding who knew what…corsica’s information was that everybody senior inside Ibrox knew what was going on regarding the finance situation. McLelland and Greig were kept in the dark however and resigned when they found out. Corsica’s information was that Greig approached Smith to ask why a long-time supplier had not been paid (they having complained to him) and was told it was now company policy in order to manage cashflow. When Grieg approached Whyte about the matter, he was told to mind his own business and it was this which triggered both his and Mclelland’s resignations.
———————————————————————————————————————–
Thanks for carrying on Corsicas good work.He would have been in his element now the sparks are beginning to fly.
Highly unlikely I know but a statement from McLelland or Greig in the near future wolud be very interesting.

View Comment

torrejohnbhoyPosted on9:52 pm - Oct 17, 2012


wottpi says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 21:46

I think I know what to do in these situations were you have a load of disfunctional freeloaders living of the state and pissing other people’s monies up against the wall. While at the same time continually having relationship issues, fall outs and publicly casting aspersions back and forth about each other.

You go for a lie detector test on the Jeremy Kyle Show!!
——————————————————————————————————
After 20 mins with Craigy & Charlie,Jeremy would need counselling 😆

View Comment

rabPosted on9:53 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Corsicacharity.

Gordon Smith, the ex rfc director, ex sfa ceo, ex players agent, ex bbc pundit, doesn’t know nuffink about embdy or anyhin ataw, he was just happened to be standing there minding his own business and keeping his head down.

Maybe.

View Comment

john clarkePosted on9:54 pm - Oct 17, 2012


goosygoosy says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 16:29
‘…Are D&P applying to COS for handover to BDO without any decision on the COI issue? Or has LH advised D&P that he now has all the information he requires to decide on COI and the Administration can therefore be concluded?..’
———–
I suspect it’s the former.

I don’t think Lord Hodge could simply give a private nod to D&P that he was happy with their report.

It would have to be more formal than that.

Perhaps LH has been deliberately waiting for the Application- to- end- Administration to come in.
He can fix a hearing for that, and then tell them that his ruling is

that they were conflicted and ought not to have accepted appointment,

that they are therefore REMOVED from office by the Court

that they are denied all fees, and are to be reported to their professional association for misconduct , etc etc.

I would enjoy listening to that kind of judgment.

The fly in the ointment is that it may be that actions an Administrator took might have to be recognised as valid, even if he is removed from office later….

At least, that’s what my amateurish reading on the subject now suggests to me, contrary to my earlier expectation that all actions of ‘conflicted’ administrators would be open to challenge….

There must be someone on the blog who knows what LH has powers to do if the administrators are found to have been conflicted?

If so, I hope they will post.

But whatever the ‘conflicted’ decision might be, formal liquidation will begin, as RFC(IA)/ Rangers 2012 finally dies, unlamented by many.

View Comment

Ed BPosted on9:55 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Jean7brodie says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 21:34

He has serious communication difficulties, rigidity of thought and is struggling socially .

————————–

Care to offer a diagnosis?

View Comment

easternexpatPosted on9:55 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Very interesting developments but, as others have mentioned, just because Whyte quotes it does not make it true, despite it seeming fortuitous.

His words do, however, raise a mass of questions which any normal professional journalist would love to devour.

Let’s see how our MSM do. We are watching…..

View Comment

spanishceltPosted on9:55 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Part of the problem with these type of interviews is just how much regards questions and direction of the interview are pre agreed.

What can or cant be asked, was it live or pre recorded , what questions were not allowed etc.

This interview was too well planned and the questions imo had been put together after/during numerous phone calls and conversations over the last week or so.

View Comment

paulsatimPosted on9:56 pm - Oct 17, 2012


spanishcelt says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 17:12

thanks SC!!

View Comment

redetinPosted on9:58 pm - Oct 17, 2012


The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr David Gauke):

“On the hon. Gentleman’s question about ministerial involvement—in his speech he raised the point about the involvement of Scottish Ministers as well—Ministers were kept informed of significant developments such as the timing of court proceedings, but HMRC did not seek or take advice from Ministers on how to handle matters that were entirely within HMRC’s responsibility. Equally, with regard to the Scottish Government, there were discussions.

HMRC was entitled to inform the Scottish Minister, because there were issues relating to devolved powers, and it was right that the Scottish First Minister was informed. At his request, HMRC explained its general policy for customers who were having difficulties paying their tax debt, and it gave him an idea of the likely time scale of its initiating administration proceedings if tax debts were not paid.

Although HMRC listened to representations that he wished to make, it neither sought nor took advice from him or other Scottish Ministers. I hope that provides some clarity.”

So, HMRC contacted the first minister, as it was “entitled” to do. They explained their “general policy”, its all they’ll ever do. HMRC do not discuss the tax affairs of anyone with 3rd parties unless they complete and submit a 64-8 Authorisation; did RFC complete a 64-8?

View Comment

jean7brodiePosted on9:58 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Edgar Blamm (@EdgarBlamm) says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 21:55

Care to offer a diagnosis?

Yes. Autistic Spectrum Disorder.

View Comment

ianagainPosted on10:00 pm - Oct 17, 2012


The story so far:
Some top tier shysters : Lloyds pull in a 2nd tier shyster in order to get whatever cash is left in the Rangers hulk. enter Craigie. and job done.
2nd tier shyster Craigie knowing the scuppers were flooding even before he pushes off the personal survival raft invites 3rd tier shyster Chuckles on board and hands him his fullproof bail out kit (floating charge) and tells him to bail like mad but remember he owes him.
Chuckles tires of bailing and realises the unwashed masses will baill for him as they cant bear the sight of the Royal Orange yacht dissapearing before the the waves. 3rd tier shyster likely to both survive keep the yacht line his pockets and sail far far away.

View Comment

Humble PiePosted on10:00 pm - Oct 17, 2012


From the BBC website:

“Former Rangers owner Craig Whyte has ‘claimed’ he introduced Charles Green to Duff and Phelps as the administrators searched for a buyer for the club.”

When asked if he was the one who had brought Mr Green to the table, Whyte answered: “Absolutely. I introduced them to Duff and Phelps.”

Mr Whyte’s version of events, however, is comprehensively ‘disputed’ by Mr Green who says, “I was not present when contact was initially made but subsequently met Craig Whyte, who introduced me to the administrator.”

So, let me get this straight, the BBC claims that Mr Whyte ‘claimed’ that he ‘introduced’ Mr Green to D&P, and Mr Green ‘disputed’ this by claiming that Mr Whyte ‘introduced’ him to D&P ??

Where is the dispute ? Given that Mr Green agreed with Mr Whyte on the introduction, Why does the BBC use the terms ‘claimed’ and ‘disputed’ instead of just reporting the ‘introduction’ as a matter of FACT ?

The implication here is that Mr Whyte is lying while Mr Green is telling the truth even thought they both said the same thing. It’s this kind of obfuscation that misleads the public and gives heart to the deluded.

View Comment

jean7brodiePosted on10:01 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Seriously, absolutely no disrespect meant. I think he is struggling.

View Comment

Billy BoycePosted on10:06 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Green’s appearance tonight will be on his and Media House’s terms. There will be absolutely no admissions or revelations – so don’t get your hopes up.

Even if a hack from the MSM ‘grilled’ him it would be like savaging a dead sheep (copyright Denis Healey). I don’t expect anyone to ask Green any hard questions, so we are just as well reading another Sevco press release.

View Comment

justshateredPosted on10:08 pm - Oct 17, 2012


As this problem deepens questions now must be asked, and more importantly answered, by the SPL and SFA.
Were they aware that RFC were likely to enter administration in late 2011?
What exactly are the details of the agreement with ‘The Rangers’ that has allowed them entry into Division 3?
Have the SFA asked why ‘The Rangers’ are so desperate to launch a share issue now when the money cannot be used to buy players as is being claimed in their propaganda?
Did they grant a licence to a club that would require the capital from a share issue to get it through its first season?
The only person connected with football in Scotland happy with this situation must be Craig Levein as it takes the pressure off him.

View Comment

rabPosted on10:09 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Edgar Blamm (@EdgarBlamm) says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 21:55

Care to offer a diagnosis?

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

He’s a fud

View Comment

AgrajagPosted on10:14 pm - Oct 17, 2012


corsicacharity says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 21:41

Regarding who knew what…corsica’s information was that everybody senior inside Ibrox knew what was going on regarding the finance situation. McLelland and Greig were kept in the dark however and resigned when they found out. Corsica’s information was that Greig approached Smith to ask why a long-time supplier had not been paid (they having complained to him) and was told it was now company policy in order to manage cashflow. When Grieg approached Whyte about the matter, he was told to mind his own business and it was this which triggered both his and Mclelland’s resignations.

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

No way.

Craigy told us on TV that he was stealing millions from the country to pay suppliers. Are you accusing him of mendacity.

View Comment

AgrajagPosted on10:17 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Tommy says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 22:06

Green’s appearance tonight will be on his and Media House’s terms. There will be absolutely no admissions or revelations – so don’t get your hopes up.

Even if a hack from the MSM ‘grilled’ him it would be like savaging a dead sheep (copyright Denis Healey). I don’t expect anyone to ask Green any hard questions, so we are just as well reading another Sevco press release.

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

He has slipped up before Faither.

Remember, on the day HMRC said they were going to reject the CVA as a matter of policy he responded by saying that “If they knew they were going to reject it on a matter of policy then why didn’t they tell US back in February” I paraphrase.

Charles Green told us he had been involved since February, long before Sir Craig Whyte did. Round about June if I remember right.

View Comment

bangordubPosted on10:19 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Ah Lads and Lassies, That interview was the following:
Planned
Prepared for
With a Definite Agenda
All we have to do is answer the above 3 points / questions.
The most interesting is what is the agenda?

View Comment

goosyPosted on10:19 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Why?
Why did Whyte the known Spiv go public with a plausible yet damning attack on fellow Spivs Green, Grier and Clark while at the same time making an implausible attempt to exonerate Minty?
It wasn’t done to uphold Whyte`s reputation for integrity
So there are only 2 possible reasons
1 It was done for money
2 It was done to steer the police investigation in a particular direction which will eventually mitigate the actions of Whyte when all the Spivs are in the dock
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Spivs rarely cooperate with the Bill in public. When they cooperate they do so in secret.
So we can rule out No 2
This leaves money as the real motivator for Whyte
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
How does Whyte profit from todays disclosure?
He profits if D&P are found guilty of conflict of interest WITHOUT him being interviewed as his voluntary statements will support the findings of LH and the Insolvency Practitioners Association
He profits if the IPO is suspended by AIM because the sale agreement could be cancelled due to COI
He profits if his RFC related actions up to Administration on 14 Feb 2012 can be defended as being within the law
He profits if his floating charge reverts back to RFC from an (unnamed) Sevco 5088 subsidiary (where it probably rests now) and does not get challenged by HMRC when RFC are liquidated. This enables Whyte to pay off Close Leasing`s fc and claim Ibrox and MP in lieu of his £27m fc claim. He can then sell the assets to genuine fans of the deid club with the proviso that the Ticketus deal is rolled over
He profits if he can secure the cooperation of Ticketus in exchange for staying silent about the identity of Ticketus investors and their probable link to Minty
He profits if in addition to the Sale Agreement to buy RFC there was also a secret agreement under which Minty paid Whyte a large bonus for keeping him out of the spotlight
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
So
It’s not part of the original plan

But it’s part of the latest plan

Popcorn time

View Comment

Lamp Post SanniesPosted on10:24 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Okay, could this be the plan re the share ‘issue’?

1. A website is set up for prospective purchasers to register their interest, cue 94,500 taxpayers registering (I joked about the number before but it looks likely).
2. Capita/Rangers know not all of these are genuine but now they have a list they can match to their season ticket database.
3. From this they have calculated that there are currently around 8,000 genuine fans interested who have pleadged around £15m
4. A genuine IPO would require a prospectus issued to all applicants necessitating divulging ownership & financial details that would de-rail the whole enterprise.
5. Craig Whyte suddenly appears out of the red, white and blue with a carefully orchestrated interview.
6. Revelations/leaks/adverse publicity after this in various media outlets mean that a public IPO might suddenly now not be viable (as per the plan)
7. Charles Green makes an impassioned plea to the fans (probably via Rangers Media/STV) that for the club to continue they need the fans’ investment.
8. The 8,000 genuine fans on the list now get letters sent to them inviting them to participate in a private, exclusive share placing.
9. No public IPO, no prospectus. Private share sales to an exclusive hand selected group of fans.
10. Most of the money needed is now raised without the need for an AIM listing (and associated costs), or the need to reveal who actually owns what, or any mechanism for the duped fans to even sell their shares in future unless the club offer to buy them back.

Is this plausible?

View Comment

campsiejoePosted on10:26 pm - Oct 17, 2012


After a relatively quiet spell I came home tonight to enough material to keep us all going for a while
Whether he is telling the truth, or his version of it, is a moot point
What he has done is throw enough mud to do an awful lot of people a lot of damage
If he did indeed tell Donkey and Topping that RFC (IA) were heading for admin, then it proves that the footballing authorities have been complicit in this fiasco since October of last year

As for our “friends” in the MSM they will try to further discredit the MBB, or will claim to have revealed all of this exclusively months ago, but we just weren’t listening

Anyway, pull up a chair, open a bottle of your favourite tipple, raise a glass to absent friends, and sit back and watch the fun

View Comment

midcalderanPosted on10:34 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Long Time Lurker says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 21:03

I was surprised that Jim Traynor was not on Sportssound this evening. Is this the first sign of the changing of the guard?
———————————
Perhaps Traynor has bowed out as he now feels he can’t do what a man must do.

As Churchill said “A man does what he must – in spite of personal consequences, in spite of obstacles and dangers and pressures – and that is the basis of all human morality.”

This could never be the code of practice of the MSM. Looking forward to see CG in few minutes on STV to see if Media House have prepared the script.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on10:35 pm - Oct 17, 2012


gie’s a gonk says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 22:24
======================
Your post sums it up perfectly. Today’s bizarre (but carefully choreographed) events are designed to ensure that the IPO is cancelled. Green then goes ahead with a private offer to the loyal bears. They will have no prospectus, no information as to what is actually owned by the company they are buying shares in, but Green has them eating out of his hand by now. The money will pour in. What a hoot!

View Comment

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on10:37 pm - Oct 17, 2012


gie’s a gonk says:
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 22:24
2 0 Rate Up
Okay, could this be the plan re the share ‘issue’?

2. Capita/Rangers know not all of these are genuine but now they have a list they can match to their season ticket database.
3. From this they have calculated that there are currently around 8,000 genuine fans interested who have pleadged around £15m

8. The 8,000 genuine fans on the list now get letters sent to them inviting them to participate in a private, exclusive share placing.
9. No public IPO, no prospectus. Private share sales to an exclusive hand selected group of fans.
10. Most of the money needed is now raised without the need for an AIM listing (and associated costs), or the need to reveal who actually owns what, or any mechanism for the duped fans to even sell their shares in future unless the club offer to buy them back.

Is this plausible?

—————————————————————–

it is indeed, but then again, why limit sending out the begging letters to just those 8000?

why not send them out to every single fan that has bought something from the rangers online shop, held a season ticket at any point in time, bought a match day ticket at any point in time, was a bond holder or shareholder in RFC

I agree there is no real plan to float on the AIM, and this has been a publicity exercise – the real plan is still to contact every member of the rangers family and ask them to chip into a private sale

more worryingly is that so much effort has gone into promoting the idea of a public floatation that some bears wont realise they have been invited to buy into a private share floatation and they won’t realise their share certs are practically worthless

frankly, this is a fraud that the likes of watchdog should be investigating as thousands of innocent (though thick as mince) bears are gonna get stung

View Comment

Lord WobblyPosted on10:41 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Chris McLaughlin @BBCchrismclaug 12s
More of Craig Whyte on Newsnight Scotland. Jim Traynor also
on to discuss the interview. BBC 1 11pm.#Rangers

View Comment

john clarkePosted on10:43 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Just watched STV’s ‘interview’ with CG. God almighty, what a useless interviewer. It was no more than free advertising for a guy well-practiced in selling.

View Comment

previouslyknownassnowdogPosted on10:44 pm - Oct 17, 2012


Just watched Chuckies interview on STV,he looked to the left just as much as CW.

View Comment

Robert CoylePosted on10:45 pm - Oct 17, 2012


May have misheard but,

Did charles green just say that ibrox independently valued at £80 million?

View Comment

midcalderanPosted on10:45 pm - Oct 17, 2012


I think I’ve just watched a PLEASE BUY OUR SHARES ADVERT. Where was Bernard Ponsonby?

View Comment

midcalderanPosted on10:46 pm - Oct 17, 2012


And yes, the questions were scripted. Shame on STV.

View Comment

billyj1Posted on10:48 pm - Oct 17, 2012


I listened to part of the Green interview tonight on Scotland Tonight.
He staed quite clearly that he has a valuation, not more than 2 weeks old, of the properties, which I presume comprise Ibrox, Murray park and the Albion training ground. He states that they are now valued at £80 million. This a few short months after he paid £5.5 million for everything.
Surely to goodnes someone must intervene in this shambles. D+P have obviously sold at undervalue, and must surely be taken to task on this. The Creditors, including HMRC have been seriously compromised,if not completely shafted.

View Comment

rabPosted on10:48 pm - Oct 17, 2012


How much did you pay for your £80m properties chazza

View Comment

Leave a Reply