Past the Event Horizon

ByBig Pink

Past the Event Horizon

On the Old Club vs New Club (OCNC) debate, the SFA’s silence has been arguably the most damaging factor with respect to the future of the game. Of course people get frustrated when there is a deliberate policy of silence on the part of the SFA which results in the endless cycle of arguments being trotted out again and again with no resolution or closure possible.

The irony (it’s only irony if you assume that the SFA have gone to great lengths to create the conditions for the unbroken history status of the new club) is that the mealy-mouthed attitude they have adopted has actually polarised opinion in a far more serious and irreconcilable way than had they just made a clear statement when Sevco were handed SFA membership. A bit of leadership, with a decision either way at that time would have spiked a lot of OCNC guns very early on, but as history shows, they were afraid of a backlash from wherever it came.

I am now convinced that Scottish Football has passed the Event Horizon and is broken beyond the possibility of any repair that might have taken it back to its pre-2010 condition. Rangers fans will never – no matter what any eventual pronouncement from Hampden may be – accept that their next trophy will be their first. The trouble is that no-one else – again despite anything from Hampden – will cast them as anything else other than a new club who were given a free passage into the higher echelons of the game. Furthermore, they will forever force that down the throats of Rangers fans whenever and wherever they play. A recipe for discord, threats of violence, actual violence, and a general ramping up of the sectarian gas that we had all hoped, only a year or so ago, was to be set to an all-time low peep.

There is a saying in politics that we get the government we deserve. It works both ways though, and the SFA will get the audience it deserves. In actual fact it is the one it has actively sought over the last couple of years, for they have tacitly (and even perhaps explicitly) admitted that Scottish Football is a dish best served garnished with sectarianism. They have effectively told us that without it, the game cannot flourish, and they stick to that fallacy even although the empirical evidence of the past year indicates otherwise.

That belief is an intellectual black-hole they have now thrust the game into. They have effectively said that only two clubs actually matter in Scottish football. The crazy thing is that to put their plans into action they have successfully persuaded enough of the other clubs to jump into the chasm and hence vote themselves into irrelevance and permanent semi-obscurity.

That belief is also shared by the majority in the MSM, who despite their lofty, self-righteous and ostensibly anti-sectarian stance, have done everything they can to stir the hornet’s nest in the interests of greater sales.
Act as an unpaid wing of a PR company, check nothing, ask nothing, help to create unrest, and then tut-tut away indignantly like Monty Python Pepperpots when people take them to task.

Consequently the victims of all the wrongdoing (creditors and clubs) walk away without any redress or compensation for the loss of income and opportunity (and history) – stripped of any pride and dignity since they do so in the full knowledge of what has happened. But even as they wipe away the sand kicked in their faces, those clubs still insist on the loyalty of their own fanbases, the same fans whose trust they have betrayed with their meek acceptance of the new, old order.

The kinder interpretation of the impotence of the clubs is that they want to avoid the hassle and move on, the more cynical view that they are interested only in money, not people. In either case, sporting integrity, in the words of Lord Traynor of Winhall (Airdrie, not Vermont), is “crap”.

The question is; which constituency of 21st century Scotland subscribes to that 17th century paradigm?
Sadly, this massive hoax, this gigantic insult to our collective intelligence, is working. Many will leave the game – many already have in view of the spineless absence of intervention from their own clubs – but many, many more will stay and support the charade.

If you doubt my prediction, ask yourself how many tickets will be unsold the first time the New Rangers play Celtic at Parkhead? That my friends will be final imprimatur of authenticity on just exactly who New Rangers are, no matter the proclamations of both sides of the OCNC argument.

About the author

Big Pink administrator

Big Pink is John Cole; a former schoolteacher based in the West of Scotland, He is also a print and broadcast journalist who is engaged in the running of SFM . Former gigs include Newstalk 106, the Celtic View, and Channel67. A Celtic fan, he is also the voice of our podcast initiative.

3,926 Comments so far

RyanGoslingPosted on8:19 pm - Dec 5, 2013


Auldheid it’s not another squirrel, and let no more be said about it, but in the tradition of this blog I’m just pointing out an error in a poster’s contribution. As you were, as they say.

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on8:19 pm - Dec 5, 2013


As you were in the sense of “please carry on as you were before my comment”

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on8:22 pm - Dec 5, 2013


Ecobhoy a good read yes, but surely more of a good read as a Rangers supporter as it is very pertinent to our current situation.

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on8:24 pm - Dec 5, 2013


Haha exiled Celt I knew I’d get pulled up on that one – but 2 is more than 1 and hence (just!) qualifies as being called “years”!

Ryan, You are correct – and thanks for the correction earlier. The subsequent argumentative post was removed. As Auldheid says, silly spats based on false assumptions are squirrels. We already have enough folk chasing them over on the other thread. Let sanity reign 🙂

View Comment

TSFMPosted on8:24 pm - Dec 5, 2013


The poll in question asked if the SPL was better or worse I believe. Given the demographic, it is reasonable to assume that around a third of those polled were TRFC fans. Even although they are not actually playing in the SPL, their view, which is unlikely to be anything other than partisan, will not surprisingly be that the SPL is worse.

Similarly, others, who assuming the existence of sentience will have sussed out the MSM purpose in holding the poll in the first place will say the opposite. Any such poll is tainted by the situation that there is no Rangers-ish team in the SPL, and thusly a waste of time and money – although providing a good platform for another stream of lies to be printed in the MSM.

I can’t say I have wide discussions with football supporters of any team (other than Rangers ironically), but those I speak to unanimously (not just a vast majority) agree that their view of Scottish football sans TRFC is more upbeat. Some of the people I talk to also talk to Graham Spiers, so I can only assume that either he doesn’t understand what people say, or they are gently ribbing the wee guy. Couldn’t just be making it up after all could he ? 🙂

The only metric that makes any sense here is the crowd figures in the top league. They do not resonate with the sound of “haste ye back!”

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on8:32 pm - Dec 5, 2013


manandboy says: (347)

December 5, 2013 at 3:18 pm

21

0

Rate This

Quantcast

Auldheid says: (1078) December 5, 2013 at 2:06 pm
“Aye but if we take the attitude the game is lost, as you appear to have adopted and happy to be corrected, then the game is lost and that really pisses me off.”
_________________________________________________________________________________________

One thing’s for sure, this ‘race’ is not 6 furlongs.

More like the Grand National – and then some !
———————————
Agreed and the fences are high but heid doon keep going.

The SFA and SPFL are vulnerable on the LNS commissioning because of information not provided by D&P acting for Rangers.

Campbell Ogilvie who instigated one ebt scheme and benefitted from another cannot deny knowledge of the difference or that at his time at Ibrox HMRC were asking questions.

If he denies knowledge then he was incompetent as an administrator and Company Secretary. He has more to lose than anyone from the truth coming out. SDM may have been the boss but he needed willing lieutenants to carry out his wishes .

Plus yer granny did not have the internet as an information tool 🙂

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on8:35 pm - Dec 5, 2013


RyanGosling says: (120)

December 5, 2013 at 8:19 pm

2

1

Rate This

Quantcast

Auldheid it’s not another squirrel, and let no more be said about it, but in the tradition of this blog I’m just pointing out an error in a poster’s contribution. As you were, as they say.
=============================
I thought it may become one so wanted it killed before it became an accepted fact.

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on8:43 pm - Dec 5, 2013


TSFM – Ryan, You are correct – and thanks for the correction earlier. The subsequent argumentative post was removed. As Auldheid says, silly spats based on false assumptions are squirrels. We already have enough folk chasing them over on the other thread. Let sanity reign 🙂

**********

Thanks for removing my “argumentative” post LOL – I only pointed out the date Craig Moore’s EBT was signed and Ryan was agreeing with me.

That is 2 posts I have had deleted today – trying not to break the World Record!

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on8:48 pm - Dec 5, 2013


Ah exiled Celt, I just contacted tsfm wondering why our comments had been removed- I think it’s fair that they were removed given how easily things can get distracted here. But I know what you meant and you know I meant, and now we won’t all spiral off In a tangent.

Get another couple of posts removed today and it could be a world record, you could join rangers / secco and help us set yet another one! 😆

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on8:51 pm - Dec 5, 2013


TheDharmaBam
ellen_coyle
EC

Thanks for posing the question to Spiers.

View Comment

TSFMPosted on9:20 pm - Dec 5, 2013


Apologies EC and RG if I misunderstood the mood of your exchange. Perhaps I rushed to judgement too quickly.
Thanks for your forbearance.

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on9:23 pm - Dec 5, 2013


Anyone want to hazard a guess at why the date of Craig’s Moore signing his EBT is so vital?

Reason is as follows.

LNS originally had as its scope from the SPL press release from March 5th 2012 as being “from July 1998” to look at RFC-NIL illegal side letters. July 1998 is the inception of the SPL so the SPL could only go back to that date.

By the time LNS was given the official go ahead in Aug 2012, the date had changed as being “from 23 Nov 2000”.

Nov 23 2000 was the date of the Torre Andre Flo side letter, just by sheer coincidence. Ronald De Boer’s was dated 30 Aug 2000. Craig Moore’s letter was Aug 3 1999. Therefore they managed to exclude the WTC side letters very nicely – although perhaps SFA forgot to tell SPL that it should have been Nov 24 probably – but hey even world class administrators get things wrong – its not like its a huge mistake like Spartans forgetting to duplicate a date is it!!!!!

Anyhow, D&P were also found guilty for not releasing any documentation as per LNS findings – so LNS was unaware of these WTC documents – and with his dates narrowed for him, did not factor in these WTC payments that RFC-NIL had conceded to HRMC they were guilty of – and that they had withheld the side letters not only from HRMC, but also the SFA/SPL and also finally LNS.

And since these were a different EBT scheme than the EBT loans, LNS would have seen the payments presented as such.

And he also would have been able to see CO’s fingerprints/signatures on the documents.

And CO would have been required to answer questions under oath on WTC EBT that he was involved in and furthermore knew that side letters had been withheld from SFA………….before joining the SFA!

Now we could never have allowed that to happen could we……………

View Comment

BarcabhoyPosted on9:29 pm - Dec 5, 2013


Tis the season to be thinking about whether you can trust your former partners in crime….

As Flo-rida says

“Can you blow my whistle baby, whistle baby
Let me know
Girl I’m gonna show you how to do it
And we start real slow
You just put your lips together
And you come real close
Can you blow my whistle baby, whistle baby
Here we go ”

There are 2 types of whistleblowers.

The first type are the ones who have been outraged by the actions of their peers or governments. Clive Ponting, Mordechai Vananunu, Harry Markopolos, Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden are all well known examples. Agree or disagree with their motives, they felt a need to make public what was being hidden. Their crime, in legal terms, was to breach their contracts or a confidentiality agreement.

I’m sure we can all think of information which was important in the context of Scottish Football , which would have remained hidden from public scrutiny if it wasn’t for the actions of individuals who took some risks to expose cheating, corruption and worse.

The second type of whistleblower is the guy who has been waist deep in dodgy dealings . He has either been the leader of immoral and/or illegal activities, or he has been a significant cog in the wheel . Important enough to be able to prove a case that would bring jail sentences and the destruction of reputations.

Barclays Bank just saved themselves £hundreds of millions by turning in their accomplices in crime. They probably felt it was only a matter of time before the truth came out, and best to be outside the tent p*ssing in rather inside the tent being p*ssed on.

Sammy the Bull Gravano, was guilty as sin. He was complicit in just about every crime John Gotti committed. He cut a deal, he effectively got a slap on the wrist for nailing Gotti.

Why did he do it ? Simple really , he realised Gotti was about to turn him in . He was going to be traded for a lighter sentence for Gotti. The instinct for self preservation is usually stronger than the instinct for loyalty.

The UTT will be sitting down early next year, late January, to determine whether MIH ran a tax scam. The Aberdeen Asset judgement must have sent a shiver down the spine of those at the heart of this . What is absolutely certain is all concerned will be considering their options.

Will The Rangers Gotti sell his foot soldiers down the river. Will The blue nosed Sammy the Bull get in first and save his own neck. Will anyone from the various lawyers , accountants, tax advisers and journalists have a crisis of conscience and feel compelled to expose the bad guys.

The question they all have to ask themselves is self preservation or loyalty to someone who may be preparing to save his own skin by setting them up to take the fall, worth the risk.

Et Tu Brute

“He that has eyes to see and ears to hear may convince himself that no mortal can keep a secret. If his lips are silent, he chatters with his fingertips; betrayal oozes out of him at every pore.”

Sigmund Freud

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on9:29 pm - Dec 5, 2013


Great post Exiled Celt. All rings a chord for me, adds up to neepheids material also.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on9:41 pm - Dec 5, 2013


Exiled Celt says: (843)

December 5, 2013 at 9:23 pm

Somehow I think that because the BTC was such a BIG tax case, the WTC was so easy to overlook/hide from anyone who didn’t follow RTC or PMGB (such as LNS). It was the one that could have blown CO out of Hampden, and taken quite a few others with him. I suppose, if truth be told, most, if not all of us on here and RTC, just didn’t realise it was such a biggy either.

View Comment

fergussingsthebluesPosted on9:44 pm - Dec 5, 2013


Ogilvie is the key here IMO.

This man has been central to both the initial scandal and the current cover up.

Not only the initial scandal! He was also at Hearts as well when their troubles were starting to smoulder!

Yet, he is a man of very few words ?

Why is that?

Mmmmm!! Let me just think for a minute!

Oh yes, I remember!

Two of Scotlands most prominent clubs have gone into Administration, one of them even liquidated.

Campbell was involved with both clubs at exactly the same time both were going through their “Dodgy” periods (which we were not aware of at the time, but are aware of now)

Fast Forward and Campbell seems to have developed a really good parachute system where he manages to bail out at the right time from the S$£t.

Presently, he has parachuted into position as “President of The Scottish Football Association”

This means he has brought his “Jinx” status to our own National Association. He is dragging it down big style!

He should have resigned last year due to conflict of interest, but he didn’t. I think he’s there until the UTT concludes, then with the usual “dignity” he will annnounce his retirement due to the usual family/personal reasons.

I don’t know about all of you out there, but the post of SFA President should be above reproach. The current incumbent has been in the post too long, is a Tax Evader himself, and should have no place in an Association that decides how Scottish Football should be governed!

As for Mr Regan, I bet he is also frustrated that he can’t get rid of Ogilvie, I wouldn’t be surprised if he legged it soon once he has made a few bob!

Think about it, Regan had nothing whatsoever to do with Scottish Football before he took up the post. He probably thought it would be a walk in the park. Unfortunately, as a CEO, he has been well and truly shafted. He might as well call himself Pinnochio, as CO and his mates are pulling his strings!

If Mr Regan was, however, to act like a proper CEO and ask the “Jinx” to clear his desk, now that would be a tremendous step forward.

Just my opinion!

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on9:54 pm - Dec 5, 2013


Barcabhoy says: (313)
December 5, 2013 at 9:29 pm

The question they all have to ask themselves is self preservation or loyalty to someone who may be preparing to save his own skin by setting them up to take the fall, worth the risk…
=============================

Are you able to be more specific Bb… ? 😉

View Comment

briggsbhoyPosted on9:58 pm - Dec 5, 2013


ecobhoy says: (2073)
December 5, 2013 at 7:36 pm

It may be worth mentioning that his body will likely be received into the church the previous evening for those who can’t make the morning but would like at least to make an effort of sorts. If you are aware of the details it may be worth posting.

View Comment

BarcabhoyPosted on10:06 pm - Dec 5, 2013


StevieBC says: (932)
December 5, 2013 at 9:54 pm
0 0 Rate This

Barcabhoy says: (313)
December 5, 2013 at 9:29 pm

The question they all have to ask themselves is self preservation or loyalty to someone who may be preparing to save his own skin by setting them up to take the fall, worth the risk…
=============================

Are you able to be more specific Bb… ?
——————————————————–
The question is : if the UTT find in favour of HMRC , then the public purse has been defrauded of over £80 million. Thats incredibly serious.

It didn’t happen in a vacuum. Lots of people played their part. Turned a blind eye,actively facilitated and allowed it to happen.

£80 million……

Do you really think HMRC will settle just for a precedent, or do you think they want heads on a stick…..

Its stick or bust time for everyone involved in this. Sitting still and staying schtum may be the dumbest thing anyone could do.

Especially as , by the time they wake up and realise a deal needs to be cut to save their skin, it might be too late.

View Comment

CarntynePosted on10:11 pm - Dec 5, 2013


bryce9a says: (95)
December 5, 2013 at 11:22 am

Rangers’ massive following and the income they provide will, as long as the club is being properly run…
_____________________________________________________________________________________

And just when exactly has the club ever been properly run?

None since Murray took over, and who knows what went on before that.

Rangers for the last twelve years or more, using a desperately dodgy spending strategy, (that’s being kind) could barely keep pace with Celtic, so how will Sevco do so using prudent financial responsibility and without the use of the EBTs they’ve been used to?

I suppose Sevco fans are entitled to dream, but it’s going to take a lot more than eventually arriving in the Premiership to put them back at the top.

A lot more.

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on10:17 pm - Dec 5, 2013


Carntyne how exactly did Rangers not keep up with Celtic in the last twelve years or so, even using a dodgy spending strategy? In the last twelve years or so honours were roughly even, including three in a row in the three years before the administration / liquidation season. Therefore by fair means or foul, and I think we all know there we’re foul methods involved, they certainly at least kept up with Celtic.

Barcabhoy another great post, and I agree entirely with everything you said. If the public purse is found to have been defrauded of £80m it cannot be allowed to rest. And even if the UTT finds in Rangers favour, it is clear that a deliberate attempt was made to avoid ridiculous amounts of tax so even if found to be strictly legal at the time, the authorities MUST make sure such loopholes are never allowed again in future, for anyone.

View Comment

Reilly1926Posted on10:20 pm - Dec 5, 2013


Another great man taken from us.

Nelson Mandela RIP

View Comment

EKBhoyPosted on10:21 pm - Dec 5, 2013


Barcabhoy says: (314)
December 5, 2013 at 10:06 pm
2 0 Rate This

StevieBC says: (932)
December 5, 2013 at 9:54 pm
0 0 Rate This
———————-

I guess the option facing some of Murray’s minions , is that if they have a good few years work ahead of them before retirement, they need to assess will Lord , sorry Sir David, weigh them in until said retirement , or will the UTT and subsequent investigation(s) involve crimes ……. accountants and lawyers likely to hold the evidence and would be candidates for coughing up.

I’d imagine anyone in that category will already have been well recompensed either through property abroad or offshore pots of dosh, that angle will be covered off by Lord, sorry Sir David Murray.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on10:37 pm - Dec 5, 2013


Auldheid,

Congrats on your latest drive. Teaching an egg sucking granny I know but the Panorama programme has a history of the most hard hitting docs following a decision (hillsborough etc), partly cause its legally safer obviously and partly because its fresh and relevant. With that in mind you would think they would be interested in your information with a view to preparing for the UTT. Your biggest problem may be personnel in BBC Scotland warning them too stay well clear.

Please note that I say this with no assumption whatsoever that the UTT will be as positive as some believe. Hope I’m wrong.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on10:49 pm - Dec 5, 2013


A reminder of the Ogilvie references from the LNS Report

Mr Ogilvie dealt with aspects of football administration at Rangers until late 2002 or early 2003. Mr Dickson then assumed responsibility for all football administration. From 1998 until the time when Mr Ogilvie ceased to deal with football administration, Mr Murray (as he then was) took the lead in negotiating player transfers and player contracts. Until the early 1990s the relative documents were prepared by Mr Ogilvie, and from then on they were dealt with by Mr Odam.

Mr Ogilvie learnt about the existence of the MGMRT in about 2001 or 2002, because a contribution was made for his benefit. He understood that this was non-contractual. Although as a result he knew about the existence of the MGMRT, he did not know any details of it. He subsequently became aware, while he remained director of Oldco, that contributions were being made to the MGMRT in respect of players. He assumed that these were made in respect of the players’ playing football, which was the primary function for which they were employed and remunerated. He had no involvement in the organisation or management of Oldco’s contributions to the MGMRT, whether for players or otherwise. He said:

“I assumed that all contributions to the Trust were being made legally, and that any relevant football regulations were being complied with. I do not recall contributions to the Trust being discussed in any detail, if at all, at Board meetings. In any event, Board meetings had become less and less frequent by my later years at Rangers.”

He also said:
“Nothing to do with the contributions being made to the Trust fell within the scope of my remit at Rangers”.

Now we know that Ogilvie signed the document relating to Moore’s DOS contribution in 1999 and attended a board meeting at which the same subject was discussed.

http://i.imgur.com/q88NFQq.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/ytPbuSp.jpg

That means that Ogilvie lied to LNS when he said that he only prepared the players documents until the early 1990s. He also lied when he said that he couldn’t recall contributions being discussed at Board meetings.

That is why the 23/11/2000 start date of the LNS commission enquiries was so important to Ogilvie with respect to the DOS Scheme.

…. and don’t get me started on his apparent ignorance of the “EBT” scheme.

View Comment

bluPosted on10:56 pm - Dec 5, 2013


easyJambo says: (599)
December 5, 2013 at 10:49 pm
A reminder of the Ogilvie references from the LNS Report
Now we know that Ogilvie signed the document relating to Moore’s DOS contribution in 1999 and attended a board meeting at which the same subject was discussed.

http://i.imgur.com/q88NFQq.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/ytPbuSp.jpg

That means that Ogilvie lied to LNS when he said that he only prepared the players documents until the early 1990s. He also lied when he said that he couldn’t recall contributions being discussed at Board meetings.

easyjambo, not quite – he could have forgotten, (even if in an Ernest Saunders kind of way) but he was and still is responsible for the decision taken by the Board of RFC to remunerate Craig Moore in this way. Murray didn’t act alone, they all stand and fall by the decisions of the Board.

View Comment

jockybhoyPosted on11:04 pm - Dec 5, 2013


Apologies all, rush of blood to the head. Easily fixed. Correction follows. Am doing it this way as the rest of my post is still IMO valid. Do slightly object to being accused of introducing a squirrel when it was an error made in haste. Would have hoped that anyone who knows my posting history wouldn’t jump to such a conclusion…

bryce9a says: (97) December 5, 2013 at 10:29 am 0 99 i
Indeed, the absence of a competitive Rangers – by ensuring the UEFA windfalls only ever go to one team’s bank account rather than spread between two – if anything serves to entrench the financial gulf between Celtic and the non-Old firm sides.

I love this mythical place where UEFA windfalls were “spread between the two” (Celtic & OldGers I assume). WhenTF was this ever the case? I don’t remember European money being “spread” to Celtic when OldGers SPENT their way to 9IAR. When Celtic were regularly coming 3rd, 4th, 5th in the league having had to deal with “austerity” under McCann. Any team that came second the OldGers WON their share of that money as they had to play by the rules….

OldGers pocketed all that money and more in their bid to “entrench the financial gulf between them AND EVERY CLUB” – you do remember “tenners for fivers” and all that jizz, sorry jazz don’t you bryce9a?

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on11:10 pm - Dec 5, 2013


blu says: (474) December 5, 2013 at 10:56 pm

easyjambo, not quite – he could have forgotten, (even if in an Ernest Saunders kind of way) but he was and still is responsible for the decision taken by the Board of RFC to remunerate Craig Moore in this way. Murray didn’t act alone, they all stand and fall by the decisions of the Board.
==================================
You are correct, but isn’t it amazing that so many people in high office seem to suffer from selective memory loss when questioned on their knowledge of events that could implicate themselves in something untoward.

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on11:13 pm - Dec 5, 2013


Exciled/Auldheid

Astute piece of detective work. Is there not a potential opportunity here? one way or another the LNS tribunal closed off the bulk of the “EBT” years. However, by tinkering around with the TOR, The Great Architect has left open the possibility of a further tribunal to examine the earlier years/WTC? Who knows it might even provoke the appearance of the 5 way, which would just lead to more questions?

Assuming of course that the clubs could be “encouraged” to demand a re-opening, but, an unequivocal result from the UTT would help with that….

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on11:13 pm - Dec 5, 2013


Jockybhoy, you have my respect for correcting that.

However, a point I didn’t notice until I saw it highlighted there was that I guess what Bryce was saying that when Celtic and Rangers regularly shared honours as in they went back and forth every couple of years, the champions leagues windfall was split rather than shared. In that sense, it is probably true to say that Celtic will just move further ahead from the rest due to constant funds that other teams don’t have. We’ve seen such things with Olympiakos, Rosenberg and others. This isn’t a pop at Celtic by any means, but I think and have thought for a long time that the champions league jackpot is so significant as to make teams at the top very entrenched and hard to break into for any team that doesn’t regularly get that jackpot. And therefore I think that the champions league has set football back a long way in terms of progress.

Further to that, I’d really like to see loan regulations brought in very strictly. It’s only a matter of time before the likes of Celtic, merely to use a Scottish example, start buying anyone who can do more than two keepie up pies just in case they turn into a player and loaning them out until they do or don’t bear fruit. Look at Chelsea this year already, happily having lukaku out damaging other teams but having had no intention of playing him themselves for the three years since they signed him. It’s becoming less and less of a team game and more and more of an economics game and it’s completely ruining the game.

Looking back over that I realise it’s all pretty off topic but I’ve typed it all now so there we go.

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on11:41 pm - Dec 5, 2013


scapaflow says: (1248)

December 5, 2013 at 11:13 pm
Exciled/Auldheid

Astute piece of detective work. Is there not a potential opportunity here? one way or another the LNS tribunal closed off the bulk of the “EBT” years. However, by tinkering around with the TOR, The Great Architect has left open the possibility of a further tribunal to examine the earlier years/WTC? Who knows it might even provoke the appearance of the 5 way, which would just lead to more questions?

Assuming of course that the clubs could be “encouraged” to demand a re-opening, but, an unequivocal result from the UTT would help with that….

****************

I think your summary is exactly what we need to emphasize – once UTT verdict comes in, it will be spun that it does not affect LNS in any shape or form since it is still loans and that only the taxes now due from MIH/DFC-NIL and (hopefully) the loan recipients are new information. The attempt to bury LNS/UTT will then commence.

However the LNS flaw of ignoring the WTC is as you say something everyone wanting SFA cleansed should want to correct. This is not about title stripping – its about the SFA fudging the TOR in order to save their skins and then put their star witnesses for the prosecution (sorry – defence!) out to ensure that LNS had no room to manoeuvre.

The fact that RFC-NIL withheld side letters is one thing – but the fact that CO was part of the side letters and remains there whilst overseeing the guardianship of the governing body is simply ludicrous.

We cannot leave the WTC to be exempt from LNS – without it CO gets a free get out of jail card, passes go and collects his pension.

With a real WTC analysis/investigation, CO has to resign. Very simple!

We need to have our clubs ensure this is done with the TOR of SFA/SPL activity for the 1998 date onwards – and ensure title stripping is not part of the remit so that chestnut is never used as the excuse not to go forward with this examination of the facts,

First question is – who changed the LNS date from 1998 to 2000?

Second question – is there any evidence that Craig Moore’s side letter was the very first? Hugh Adams’ statement that it had gone on for many years and in this article he says one may have started in mid 90’s.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2109018/Rangers-accused-misleading-SFA-secret-deals.html?ITO=1490

If this is correct then CO is more conflicted than he is ever making out – for the avoidance of doubt, his career depends on WTC and LNS being kept polars apart!

And before we hear the MH slandering of Hugh Adam saying he was just an old man, senile etc – read his interviews and see how accurate his memory and grasp of reality was…..

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/latest/adam-shakes-ibrox-pillars-with-warning-of-bankruptcy-1-595808

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/spl/rangers/interview-hugh-adam-seven-years-after-sounding-a-dire-warning-over-rangers-future-1.928796

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on11:44 pm - Dec 5, 2013


“the fact that CO was part of the side letters and remains there whilst overseeing the guardianship of the governing body is simply ludicrous.”

Marvellous statement. Get that on a banner outside Hampden.

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on11:53 pm - Dec 5, 2013


Barca

Good post. I’ve never bought the idea that Mr David Murray was “Emotionally Rangers”. he loved, and made good use of the cachet, and entry into the upper reaches of business/society, of being owner of Rangers, but, aside from winning, I don’t believe he had a deep attachment to the club.

If it comes to a choice between mitigating the damage to his own interests, and trashing Rangers, I don’t think he’ll need more than a second or two to make a decision.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on1:31 am - Dec 6, 2013


easyJambo says: (600)

December 5, 2013 at 11:10 pm

9

0

Rate This

Quantcast

blu says: (474) December 5, 2013 at 10:56 pm

easyjambo, not quite – he could have forgotten, (even if in an Ernest Saunders kind of way) but he was and still is responsible for the decision taken by the Board of RFC to remunerate Craig Moore in this way. Murray didn’t act alone, they all stand and fall by the decisions of the Board.
==================================
You are correct, but isn’t it amazing that so many people in high office seem to suffer from selective memory loss when questioned on their knowledge of events that could implicate themselves in something untoward.
===========================================
The thing about that meeting is that it was not just a general board meeting, it was one to look at remuneration strategy i.e it was a policy setting meeting and the idea that the approving parties did not know what they were embarking on is absurd as is the notion CO was unaware by the time he testified to LNS of the difference between the wtc and the btc. having instigated one and benefitted from the other but did not speak to the earlier ebts.

There was no side letter uncovered for Moore (he may not have asked for one) so it is possible it may have been initiated correctly if the SFA were notified of the payment but thisis not true of the arrangements for De Boer and Flo made within less than a year featuring concealed side letters as part of the remuneration strategy approved at the Board meeting.

Here is what CO openly said to the media when asked about ebts when the news broke he was an ebt beneficiary.

*** http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/9144140/Campbell-Ogilvie-admits-he-was-aware-of-Rangers-EBT-scheme-but-had-no-role-in-player-contracts.html

Campbell Ogilvie admits he was ‘aware’ of Rangers EBT scheme but had no role in player contracts
Campbell Ogilvie has vowed to continue in his role as Scottish Football Association president as he insisted he had no role in “drafting or administering” player contracts at Rangers after the mid-1990s.

By Telegraph staff and agencies
5:38PM GMT 14 Mar 2012

Ogilvie has come under pressure after the SFA and then the Scottish Premier League vowed to investigate the alleged non-disclosure of payments to Rangers players during his spell at Ibrox.

The former Rangers company secretary confirmed he had been a member of the Employee Benefit Trust (EBT) scheme, which was the subject of a tax tribunal in January and could cost the Ibrox club £49 million. Ogilvie moved to clarify his role at the club and insisted he would “look forward to new and exciting challenges ahead at the Scottish FA”. Ogilvie, who was employed at Ibrox from 1978 until leaving for Hearts in 2005, spoke out after his position was questioned given the ongoing investigation into Rangers’ financial affairs. Ogilvie protested his innocence over the contracts issue although he admitted benefiting from the controversial EBT scheme.

In a statement published on the SFA’s website, Ogilvie said: “In light of today’s comments by (former Rangers owner) Sir David Murray, and the ongoing speculation surrounding my role as president of the Scottish FA and my previous employment as a director of Rangers FC, I would like to take this opportunity to clarify the following points.

“I was aware of the EBT scheme in operation at Rangers during my time at the club and, indeed, was a member. The existence of the scheme was published in Rangers’ annual accounts.
“My role at Rangers, until the mid-90s, included finalising the paperwork for player registrations.
“As confirmed by Sir David Murray today, it was never my role to negotiate contracts during my time at Rangers.

“It is also worth noting that, since the mid-90s, I was not responsible for the drafting or administering of player contracts.

“I ceased being company secretary in 2002 and became general secretary responsible for football strategy, in effect becoming the main point of contact between the club and the respective league and governing bodies.

“In relation to the recent investigation, I can confirm that I asked to be excluded from the Scottish FA’s independent inquiry into Rangers.

“In the interests of good governance it was absolutely right that this was the case.”

The SFA’s recent inquiry into Rangers briefly incorporated allegations of undisclosed payments to players following claims by former Ibrox director Hugh Adam.

Adam claimed some payments were not included in official contracts that were registered with the football authorities, with the 86-year-old “pretty sure” similar payments were being made as early as the mid-1990s.

The EBT scheme ran from 2001 to 2010 and followed a similar offshore payments programme from 1999-2003, which sparked a separate £2.8 million claim from Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs. Rangers last year conceded this case but Craig Whyte did not pay the sum after taking over in May.
The SFA dropped their investigations into the issue after the SPL announced an inquiry into the alleged non-disclosure of payments to players from 1998, although the main governing body would hear any appeal.
Ogilvie is determined to carry on in his role, which he was elected to in June last year following a spell as vice-president.
“I am proud and privileged to be president of the Scottish FA during an exciting period in its history,” he said.
“I have an excellent relationship with our chief executive, Stewart Regan, and the board of directors.
“I would like to thank them for their support throughout this process and look forward to new and exciting challenges ahead at the Scottish FA.”

**** http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2116686/Rangers-crisis-Campbell-Ogilvie-received-95k-EBT-cash.html

Scottish Football Association president Campbell Ogilvie has admitted receiving £95,000 from Rangers’ controversial Employee Benefit Trust scheme and admitted he might have asked more questions of the way the club was run under Sir David Murray.

The Scottish Premier League are investigating alleged undisclosed payments to Rangers players from 1998, which centre on the EBT scheme, now the subject of a potential £49million tax tribunal.
Former Rangers director and company secretary Ogilvie had already denied any role in drafting player contracts after the mid-1990s.

Ogilvie, who became general secretary in 2002 and left Ibrox in 2005 after 27 years, told Sunday newspapers:
‘I knew the EBT scheme was in place, but I didn’t know the extent of it and which players had them.
‘I didn’t believe they were risky as the Murray Group took a lot of legal and tax advice when the scheme started.”
‘I don’t know how Rangers used them with players but I was in the scheme.
‘In my case it was an offer of a discretionary bonus or a contribution into the trust. I chose to pay in and then apply for a loan. That’s how it works.
‘I got three payments between 2001 and 2003. It was £5,000 each time and as part of my settlement when I left the club I got a figure of £80,000.
‘It was a discretionary contribution into the trust and then I applied for a loan. I don’t want to get into intricacies but you have to repay the loans over a period of time.
‘There was nothing illegal about it. I have to stress that. I’ve a clear conscience.
Former director Hugh Adam has claimed players were given supplementary paperwork in addition to registered contracts, but Murray has denied the existence of dual contracts.
‘I have no knowledge of any side contracts and I would be very surprised if that was the case,’ Ogilvie said. ‘If anything comes up that I’m not aware of then I’ll put my hands up.
‘You know the way the club was run. I was a director and we had a controlling shareholder who ran the club.
‘I don’t know what I could have done. Maybe I should have questioned things more.’

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on1:58 am - Dec 6, 2013


jockybhoy says: (287)

December 5, 2013 at 4:34 pm

bryce9a says: (97) December 5, 2013 at 10:29 am 0 99 i
Indeed, the absence of a competitive Rangers – by ensuring the UEFA windfalls only ever go to one team’s bank account rather than spread between two – if anything serves to entrench the financial gulf between Celtic and the non-Old firm sides.

I love this mythical place where UEFA windfalls were “spread between the two” (Celtic & OldGers I assume). WhenTF was this ever the case? I don’t remember European money being “spread” to Celtic when OldGers EBT’d their way to 9IAR. When Celtic were regularly coming 3rd, 4th, 5th in the league having had to deal with “austerity” under McCann. Any team that came second the OldGers WON their share of that money as they had to play by the rules….

OldGers pocketed all that money and more in their bid to “entrench the financial gulf between them AND EVERY CLUB” – you do remember “tenners for fivers” and all that jizz, sorry jazz don’t you bryce9a?
=================================
This will not be popular with fellow Celtic supporters but UEFA have a lot to answer for in the way CL money is distributed within countries.

Without a league there would be no title winners so why should clubs who contribute to a leagues existence not get a share of the UEFA prize money which is about to increase with the BT deal? I know there is a solidarity payment but is it enough?

I know it was the big clubs who want the lion’s share but unless they form a breakaway league .they depend on the smaller clubs in their respective countries for the platform that takes them into Europe. So why not a more equitable distribution of CL winnings but on a basis the extra is awarded for clubs developing their own players rather than it simply increasing wage bills with no increase in quality or competitiveness. It might be used to reward clubs who meet break even ratios for example.

I would argue that it was the pursuit of UEFA geld in 2008 that was a major factor in Ranger’s ruin and the corruption of our game thereafter.

Instead of trying to administer shock treatment to a dying body, some intellectual input from the governors and smsm, who appear bereft of such capacity, would provide a more productive platform for discussion than “yer deid, naw we urny”

A sensible adjustment would reduce the temptation to cheat and spread the income more equitably without damaging the prospects of the qualifying club to a degree that would make it uncompetitive in its group. In fact a more competitive domestic scene might sharpen a qualifying club’s competitiveness in Europe.

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on4:19 am - Dec 6, 2013


Auldheid says: (1084)

December 6, 2013 at 1:31 am

There was no side letter uncovered for Moore (he may not have asked for one) so it is possible it may have been initiated correctly if the SFA were notified of the payment but this is not true of the arrangements for De Boer and Flo made within less than a year featuring concealed side letters as part of the remuneration strategy approved at the Board meeting
************

For the avoidance of doubt but also to ensure the facts that are posted here by me are correct for everyone to note and follow…..

On my earlier post I referred to a letter to Craig Moore date Aug 3rd 1999 – I should have clarified that this was in reference to the HMRC findings of a letter sent to him on the date from RFC-NIL explaining how the scheme worked. You are correct that this Aug 3rd 1999 correspondence was not an actual side letter in the same format as was given to Flo and De Boer. Apologies for the confusion on my part,

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on5:44 am - Dec 6, 2013


Nice to see a substantial discussion once again.

As an aside it’s maybe worth mentioning (briefly) the issue of the so-called joke at the recently-broadcast meeting chaired by Gordon Smith has been brought up on air. A caller to THAT phone-in brought the subject up. The caller said he was from New Zealand. No one on the panel seemed to have been aware of the incident. GD asked if it could have been a doctored video. Someone else asked if Celtic had made a complaint. But the caller did well to ask why this episode went unmentioned, especially by CO in the wake of the Rory Blair rumpus. Attention was also drawn to Gordon Smith’s mirth, what with him being a sometime pundit on the programme.

View Comment

jockybhoyPosted on5:50 am - Dec 6, 2013


RyanGosling: my objection was based around the implication that Celtic and OldGers were in cahoots by “sharing” european revenues. In fact Murray tried to bury Celtic by buying up Celtic targets, the most celebrated early example was Mo Johnston.

Clearly Celtic’s youth systen is for our own benefit but i think Celtic should be given more credit for the way they help nurture young Irish and Scottish players. As a Celtic fan I am keenly aware how many products of the Celtic youth system are in Scottish football – most of them score against us!

And finally: The Champions league format is designed to benefit big countries (defined by tv markets). That the big counties clubs get automatic access for coming 3rd and 4th whilst actual Champions have to go through x number of qulaifiers makes a mockery of the designation Champions. Auldheid, I would not be against more equitable sharing of CL revenues if that was a continent-wide initiative.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on6:02 am - Dec 6, 2013


Carntyne says: (96)
December 5, 2013 at 10:49 pm

The point is, just how will Sevco keep up if/when they arrive in the Premiership, without the aid of financial dodgy dealing?
==================================
This is what really concerns me. When the club from Ibrox land in the top league they will be under incredible pressure to put in an instant challenge to Celtic. If vast sums start being spent with no logical explanation of where it came from you just know that the media will celebrate the position rather than scrutinise it.

View Comment

jockybhoyPosted on6:22 am - Dec 6, 2013


Upthehoops: that’s the beauty of the plc and the audited accounts. We will see where money is coming from and where it is going.

That said I really do think someone will try to take them private. I really dont think they can make their business (sic) model work within the public eye.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on7:10 am - Dec 6, 2013


jockybhoy says: (289)
December 6, 2013 at 6:22 am
That’s the beauty of the plc and the audited accounts. We will see where money is coming from and where it is going.

That said I really do think someone will try to take them private. I really dont think they can make their business (sic) model work within the public eye.
===================================================
If there’s a will there’s a way. One lesson we have learned since Murray took over at Ibrox is there has always been a will, and several ways have been found. Your views on them being returned to a private business model are interesting. One thing we do know is that if the cash starts flowing in big transfer fees, the media will be standing clearing the road for them. Ultimately, their only aim is to put Celtic firmly in their place, and completely rule the roost in Scotland more often than not. It is clear by now they could not care less whether that is achieved by foul means.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on9:37 am - Dec 6, 2013


Danish Pastry says: (1768)
December 6, 2013 at 5:44 am

Heard the call last night.
Gordon Daziel and Jim Delahunt said they knew nothing about the ‘joke’ made at the requisitioners meeting, to which the caller quickly replied along the lines of ‘ Exactly my point – why was it not reported in the same way the Peter Lawwell Rory Bremner ‘joke’ was’.

The ‘joke’ is of course a side issue.

The wider point is that the Requisitioners had a meeting with 500 fans that was put out on Youtube and the presenters and pundits on SSB claim they didn’t’ know it was there hadn’t seen it so couldn’t comment..

I know its only SSB but how many others in the MSM haven’t watched the youtube version of the meeting.

Can you imagine David Dimbelby and the politicians turing up for Question Time not having a clue about what the weeks news was and being unprepared for questions from the public.

Rather than just printing and talking about PR guff the youtube posting provides them with the story straight from the horse mouth. If I was so unprepared in my job then I’d be in trouble.

As many pointed out here if they had watched it then why are they not reporting that some guys are still waiting for the requisitioners answers to the key quesrtions of where money is coming from and how long it is going to take to get back to the top.

View Comment

FinlochPosted on9:42 am - Dec 6, 2013


wottpi says: (1308)
December 6, 2013 at 9:37 am

……………..
They’ve all seen it.
They are simply turning a blind eye and keeping on message.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on9:44 am - Dec 6, 2013


Finloch says: (235)
December 6, 2013 at 9:42 am

Of course that had crossed my mind but I’d hate to be in a position of calling some people liars without having evidence. 🙂

View Comment

jockybhoyPosted on9:48 am - Dec 6, 2013


No-one else around? OK, the devil makes work for idle hands – I think I was wrongly conflating 2 issues – Celtic being gazumped on Mo Johnston where tax was mentiponed as a factor and subsequent tax schemes emanating from Ibrox. Johnston was apparently due to pay back taxes here in the UK which Celtic’s old board were balking at. Apparently OldGers paid those (and offered a higher salary?) which tipped the balance in their favour.

Ironic then that RFC-NIL’s 9iar was kick-started by paying someone elses tax! :mrgreen:

View Comment

Madbhoy24941Posted on9:52 am - Dec 6, 2013


1. wottpi says: (1308)
December 6, 2013 at 9:37 am

The wider point is that the Requisitioners had a meeting with 500 fans that was put out on Youtube and the presenters and pundits on SSB claim they didn’t’ know it was there hadn’t seen it so couldn’t comment..

————————-

They “claim” they didn’t know? Well that speaks volumes.

This is the biggest story in Scottish football today. Here we have a group of influential businessmen trying to find answers, attempting to get one of our biggest supported clubs on track and expose another group of businessmen who they feel are abusing the fans and the business. These same guys who are also largely suspected of only having their own interests at heart and with no credible business plans to achieve their aims.

They decide to have question/answer session with key supporter groups and individuals.

If anyone in the media is not interested in the outcome of this session and who have not attended or checked out the footage with the aim of commenting or furthering the debate, well they should not have a job in sports media.

Simple and shocking if that claim is true.

View Comment

FIFAPosted on10:05 am - Dec 6, 2013


C’mon guys when the same people commented the week before that they had turned the Hearts V Celtic game off after 15 min,but would be prepared to take punters call on this game ,I remember years ago standing in a bar in Maryhill with the late Jim Blair on an early Saturday evening and as the Partick Thistle supporters where comming in he was asking them ,in detail about the game ,sure enough on the following Mondays Times ,there it was as per ,this happened on more than one occasion ,Jim was some guy.

View Comment

FinlochPosted on10:07 am - Dec 6, 2013


wottpi says: (1309) 9:44 am

Of course that had crossed my mind but I’d hate to be in a position of calling some people liars without having evidence.
………………………………
There is an unspoken code of conduct among the journalists and the radio guys (pundits and editors) to say nothing about all things Rangers that might cause offence to the bears.
That means truth and analysis went out the window a long time ago.
Right now they report either what they are handed by people like Jack or whatever has already been discussed and is “approved” news. Their comments are all on the “new accepted truth” about the club.
Its disgraceful from independent media titles and stations who are bending the truth all the time.
its even more disgraceful when it is spouted on the BBC which should be above all that.

We live in a country where the old bias still exists in the media and it is just plain wrong and unacceptable.

View Comment

MoreCelticParanoiaPosted on10:08 am - Dec 6, 2013


loamfeet says: (57)
December 4, 2013 at 3:52 pm
97 2 i

I see the Evening Times has commissioned a YouGov poll to ask whether people in Scotland miss regular Old Firm games. The headline says:

“Poll: We Miss Old Firm Games”

The summary says:

“A clear majority of people believe senior football in Scotland has been diminished by the loss of regular Old Firm matches between Celtic and Rangers.”

The actual question asked of 1,200 respondents was:

“Would you say the SPL is better or worse off without regular Old Firm matches between Celtic and Rangers?”

And the actual responses were:

18% Much worse
18% Somewhat worse
14% Neither better nor worse
10% Somewhat better
9% Much better
31% No opinion

First of all, the question that was asked does not align very well with the claim in the headline. Secondly, I am not sure how 36% adds up to the clear majority mentioned in the article summary. Surely the key finding is that 64% – a real clear majority – either don’t care about the loss of Rangers or think the SPL was no worse off without them?
_____________________________________

I really miss watching Seve Ballesteros in the Ryder Cup but unfortunately the great man is no longer around. Sergio Garcia couldn’t lace his spikes.

Although I’m a Celtic fan I also miss the early to mid 80s when Aberden, Dundee Utd and Hearts regularly challenged for cups and titles. Although success for Celtic in those days was less frequent there was a sense that it was hard earned and as with human nature the relative rarity of it made it sweeter.

So what favours should be done for these clubs to make them competitive again? And why should these favours not extend to Motherwell, Hibs, St Mirren etc? Where do we stop? Why is there only an expectation that Sevco should be given favours to make them competitive at the expense of others?

So the whole question – even if it showed 100% of fans missed “Old Firm” games – is a giant irrelevance.

View Comment

Matty RothPosted on10:32 am - Dec 6, 2013


Anyone claiming that UEFA CL money spread between 2 big clubs rather than one big club is some sort of panacea for Scottish Football is really taking the biscuit. What a load of disingenuous claptrap.

As a fan of a smaller Scottish club and a fan of Scottish football in general let me make 2 points as clear as I can:

1) 20 years of leagues titles shared between 2 teams or 20 years of titles won by the dame team makes no difference to me whatever. It’s still completely uncompetitive from my point if view. Therefore there is NO good reason in my book to restore a new rangers club back to the top and claims we need that for a competitive league are simply a means to justify giving a new club a hand up to the top league.

2) the notion that sharing prize money between 2 of our richest clubs is in any way better for Scottish football than it all going to 1 club again completely misses the point of what would be good for Scottish football. There is no significant benefit to any other club in Scotland provided by a new rangers club being back in the SPL competing for titles.

Maybe these same apologists should actually try pushing an agenda that is actually good for Scottish football as a whole rather than presenting what’s good for their team as if its good for everyone else too. It’s not.

As a few have pointed out the creation of the champions league has served to create 2 huge divides. One between the top teams and the rest in each country, a second between the very small pool of big clubs who regularly get to the final stages consolidating their wealth year on year.

If these supposed fans of Scottish football, and the pundits spouting the same nonsense really cared these are the sort of things they would campaign to redress.

In Scottish terms this could be achieved by having our own solidarity payments where say 25% of all European prize money is distributed amongst the SPFL sides.

View Comment

coineanachantaighePosted on10:58 am - Dec 6, 2013


FIFA says: (444)
December 6, 2013 at 10:05 am
C’mon guys when the same people commented the week before that they had turned the Hearts V Celtic game off after 15 min,but would be prepared to take punters call on this game ,I remember years ago standing in a bar in Maryhill with the late Jim Blair on an early Saturday evening and as the Partick Thistle supporters where comming in he was asking them ,in detail about the game ,sure enough on the following Mondays Times ,there it was as per ,this happened on more than one occasion ,Jim was some guy.
==============================================
Remember similar stories of the late Alec Cameron of the Record. Would apparently sit in the boozer and ask for details of a game when fans came in. Got to the stage that fans would start making up stuff that never happened just to see if it made it into his report. 🙂

View Comment

MoreCelticParanoiaPosted on11:04 am - Dec 6, 2013


Exiled Celt says: (845)
December 5, 2013 at 9:23 pm
93 1 i

Excellent summation, however a wee question about CO having to testify under oath bit – I was under the impression that the whole LNS judgement/debacle, in legal terms amounted to no more than a client asking for a legal interpretation from a QC/judge. Therefore there was no testimony under oath in the traditional courtroom sense and the judgement/opinion does not carry the weight of legal precedent or of the outcome of a formal legal proceeding. Is that correct? If so, it still in no way diminishes the central point of the post and in face adds to the sense of chicanery surrounding it all.

View Comment

TorquemadaPosted on11:30 am - Dec 6, 2013


I agree with both the morality and the desirability of the outcome of Auldheid’s proposal for a fairer distribution of CL wealth across football but we are onto plums if we think it will ever get backing from Uefa.

The money is divided the way it is because Uefa fears the big clubs will break away – a very justifiable fear, I would have thought. The bigwigs like Platini will be watching – and learning from – the outrageous behaviour of England’s rugby clubs in destroying the Heineken Cup in their vile pursuit of even more money at the expense of their neighbours.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on11:37 am - Dec 6, 2013


wottpi says: (1309)
December 6, 2013 at 9:44 am
8 0 Rate This

Finloch says: (235)
December 6, 2013 at 9:42 am

Of course that had crossed my mind but I’d hate to be in a position of calling some people liars without having evidence.
———–

That’s my take on it too. Just a pity Gordon Smith wasn’t in the studio. Mind you, I reckon the question will be raised again. As the chair, he could easily have distanced himself and the others from that kind of talk. It was all he was there for, to keep some kind of decorum.

One thing that did puzzle me was why they asked the press to leave at the start of the meeting yet proceeded to broadcast to the rest of the planet live on youtube.

View Comment

readceltPosted on11:39 am - Dec 6, 2013


It is a sad day. Football and politics make uneasy bedfellows but can be a powerful force for good.

Maybe one of the consequence of being a son of Glasgow and growing up when, without so many distractions, things seemed to really matter.
Maybe Glasgow, taking the lead by offering the freedom of the city in 1981 to a man who the then prime minister described as a terrorist, could and still can, show the way in so many things.

It is sad that with such strong ties to Glasgow, football and its governing bodies cannot take the type of strong lead shown by the city in 1981.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/06/07/how_soccer_defeated_apartheid

View Comment

BartinMainPosted on12:28 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Rangers International was admitted to the LSE on the 19th December 2012.

http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail.html?announcementId=11433739

The lock- in period, as everyone knows, lasts for 12 months and thus ceases on the 19th December 2013.

That just happens to be the date of the Ibrox club’s AGM.

Smart move by the Spivs.

Whilst they’re being confronted by hundreds of Bears, they’ll be quietly selling all of their shares. 😆

View Comment

jimlarkinPosted on12:33 pm - Dec 6, 2013


http://www.followfollow.com/news/tmnw/sons_of_struth_to_leaflet_ibrox_on_saturday_817286/index.shtml?

Why are the Sevconians bothered about boardroom shuffles or directors etc as they have a business to run and as everybody knows a football ”club” is completely separate from the business, so why waste any energy or even money ?

Or has the penny dropped !?

View Comment

buddy_hollyPosted on12:40 pm - Dec 6, 2013


On distribution of UEFA money. Primarily distribution of CL money, group stage and beyond.

This is a problem in every league in UEFA, big or small.

To be more objective it is better to not make it about celtic and rangers or scottish football at all. Better to deal with other leagues.

It is why in other smaller leagues, clubs have become more dominant because their domestic dominance is exacerbated by the CL group stage money. Examples being Basle, Rosenberg.

Basle have won 7 of last 10 swiss leagues, last 5 in a row. And this year have another chance to progress beyond group stage, but guaranteed europa league.

Rosenberg, subsequently lost their dominance. from about 2005 due to an inflow of capital to other Norwegian clubs, though they are still competitive, second this year i think!

In the EPL, even though TV money is huge, the previous big 4 of man U, arsenal, liverpool, chelsea were always in CL. until Man City capital pushed its way in. Liverpool fell out and it is why there is such a race to get back into this 4. Obviously previously chelsea muscled into the top spots with romans money.

But back to topic, I agree with others UEFA need to balance competition against the big club threat of breakaway.

Platini wanted more smaller countries in, a direct consequence of this is that those smaller countries will get CL money which will unbalance their domestic leagues. Because those smaller countries only have 1 CL entrant.

I agree for the smaller SPL clubs, st mirren, kilmarnock, it makes no odds if celtic win the league each year or if celtic and RFC(IL) win the league each year. Further it makes even less influence on falkirk, arbroath, queens park etc,.,.,. .

I do not think this is going to change in the short/medium term, if anything the UEFA money will increase, going by the TV deal sold out to BT sport.

This setup with the CL money being able to dangle a huge carrot is what has made many clubs gamble and over extend and get themselves into such bother that administration or liquidation follow. RFC(IL) are a lesson to all european clubs!

Buddy

View Comment

coatbrigbhoyPosted on1:28 pm - Dec 6, 2013


http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/the-funeral-of-paul-mcconville/#more-4230

View Comment

wottpiPosted on1:39 pm - Dec 6, 2013


For those interested a couple of deals at 100k and 125k today at the 39p mark.
No indication if buy or sell.

View Comment

JLeeHookerPosted on1:45 pm - Dec 6, 2013


http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail.html?announcementId=11798310

RNS Number : 9359U
Rangers Int. Football Club PLC
06 December 2013

Rangers International Football Club plc
(“Rangers”, “RIFC” or the “Company”)

Statement by The Chairman

The Chairman of RIFC has issued an open letter to shareholders, which will be published on the website http://www.rangers.co.uk today. The letter addresses certain misleading and defamatory statements which have appeared in the press recently.

The Directors believe that the AGM on 19 December 2013 is very important to secure the future stability of the Company and strongly recommend that shareholders make their voting decisions based only on verified information.

For further information please contact:

Rangers International Football Club plc

Graham Wallace
Brian Stockbridge
Tel: 0141 580 8647

Daniel Stewart & Company plc
Tel: 020 7776 6550
Paul Shackleton / James Thomas

Newgate Threadneedle
Tel: 020 7148 6143
Graham Herring / Roddy Watt / John Coles

Media House International Ltd
Tel: 020 7710 0020
Jack Irvine

This information is provided by RNS
The company news service from the London Stock Exchange

View Comment

JLeeHookerPosted on1:47 pm - Dec 6, 2013


http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/5759-an-open-letter-from-the-chairman

Friday, 06 December 2013 13:30
An Open Letter From The Chairman

AS a listed company, the members of the Rangers Board have to be very careful and professional in the way in which we communicate information.

This is clearly not the case for the requisitioners, who can make all sorts of wild and spurious allegations.

My concern is that these unprofessional, wild allegations are being used just like bogey men were used when I was a child. But in this case, they are being used to frighten our supporters and shareholders. So, within the bounds of what I can say, I would like to put some of these bogey men to rest.

Firstly, I read wild accusations that I may not be independent. This is usually accompanied by a list of names from the club’s past. Let me say categorically, that until I joined the Board a mere 4 weeks ago yesterday, I had never heard of Charles Green, Imran Ahmad, Craig Whyte, or any of the other characters in Rangers’ history. To my knowledge, I have never met them, nor had business dealings with them. Nor would I recognise them if I passed them on a street.

When I was approached to join the Board, the Company had only two directors and the immediate priority was to preserve the AIM Listing. Surely it is naïve to think that there is any way the Nominated Adviser could have allowed anyone not totally independent to take on this position at that time?

I have now read over two years of board minutes and they make very depressing reading in terms of the scale of their lack of professionalism and worse. The minutes make it clear, in my mind, that the boards of recent years have been totally unfit to run this club.

The mystery to me is why people should now be considering that members of these boards, which presided over the problems we face today, should be considered for re-election. Although I have learned one lesson, which is that if you shout long enough and loud enough in the media, you may be able to reinvent yourself.

Recent inaccurate and, in fact, completely untrue allegations have included a new bogey man about Jack Irvine’s contract. I have looked at this and can say that he has a normal contract, with no bonuses attached and the figures quoted by Mr Scott Murdoch are utter nonsense. Let me also say that Graham Wallace and I are beginning a complete review of every contract that is in place. You can imagine that this is going to take weeks and then more time where contracts need to be changed. I have been on board four weeks yesterday and Graham less than that, but we have already begun this critical process.

One area, where we are conscious that we need to focus, is in improving our communication and engagement with all Rangers supporters. We have already commenced work to identify what is required to fully engage with our fan base and we will be bringing forward some significant proposals in the near future. The Board is fully behind improving the communication and engagement with the fans.

Another bogey man relates to the club’s finances. We have said publicly a number of times that any talk of the club going into administration is completely untrue. Yes, we will need to make decisions to improve cash flows and strengthen the business, but these will be the right decisions at the right time.

Another new bogey man thrown about by the Gang of Four is the suggestion that we might be thinking of selling Ibrox. We are not thinking about this. Where do the requisitioners get these ideas from? I promise you we have no intention of a sale.

Brian Stockbridge suffers most from the lies thrown around by the people in the process of reinventing themselves. Even the requisitoners must understand that finance directors are members of boards and their actions are largely dictated by the board.

Reading the minutes of the last two years or more, I see that Mr Murray was involved at board level for long periods covering contract and financial negotiations. It is not that Finance Directors make mistakes, rather that boards make mistakes, or worse.

Without Brian, the club would, in my opinion, have been de-listed months ago and ironically the club should owe him a debt of gratitude for holding things together. Going forward, his new CEO, Graham Wallace, needs time to evaluate the whole structure within the business and the people within it. This will be true for Brian as for everyone else.

For the good of the club, for the good of the supporters and for the good of the shareholders, I sincerely hope that the shareholders will get behind the existing board and vote for us.

In addition, I encourage shareholders to vote against the four requisitioners. Firstly, because some of them were members or chairman of boards which failed this club in the past. Secondly, we need a Board selected from the best available people. Not just from fanatics who put their own personal interest ahead of the greater good of the club.

If these people were to join the board they would be taking up positions which should be held in future by the best, professional people with Rangers true best interests at heart and not having their involvement driven by their own personal self interest.

Best regards,

David Somers

View Comment

neepheidPosted on1:56 pm - Dec 6, 2013


JLeeHooker says: (76)
December 6, 2013 at 1:47 pm
0 0 Rate This

http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/5759-an-open-letter-from-the-chairman

Now that is desperate- behold, the end is nigh.

View Comment

FIFAPosted on1:58 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Oh David
Where do we start ,you said previously you where a Rangers man ,yet you have never heard of the of the 3 Amigos,must of been off the planet for a few years,never mind the bogey men ,the man on the moon prob knew about the Amigos ,anyway these bogey men will need to be good to face up to the bears.

View Comment

twopandaPosted on2:08 pm - Dec 6, 2013


AS a listed company, the members of the Rangers Board have to be very careful and professional in the way in which we communicate information.
.
Ahem 😉
• There are a lot of Bogeymen – Blimey
• But – no bogeymen here – Phew!
• Our [non bogeymen] are the best professional people with Rangers true best interests at heart and not having their involvement driven by their own personal self[-]interest. [Hyphenated] – so there!!
.
[Well glad that’s all cleared up – mrs twopanda will be well pleased 😉 ]

View Comment

buddy_hollyPosted on2:15 pm - Dec 6, 2013


neepheid says: (917)
December 6, 2013 at 1:56 pm
2 0 Rate This

JLeeHooker says: (76)
December 6, 2013 at 1:47 pm
0 0 Rate This

http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/5759-an-open-letter-from-the-chairman

Now that is desperate- behold, the end is nigh.

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

It is a statement like this with so many inconsistencies that i miss the long ramblings of the late mr. paul mcconville.

Buddy

PS: trying the blockquote stuff too!
PPS: got blockquote working….

View Comment

No1 BobPosted on2:17 pm - Dec 6, 2013


A Question.

Are all the Rangers Men now Bogey Men?

Or are only some of the Rangers Men now Bogey Men?

Or is it just Murray and his gang who are now Bogey Men?

Or are they all just Bogey’s?

View Comment

briggsbhoyPosted on2:30 pm - Dec 6, 2013


JLeeHooker says: (76)
December 6, 2013 at 1:47 pm

Sevco Statement

“Let me say categorically, that until I joined the Board a mere 4 weeks ago yesterday, I had never heard of Charles Green, Imran Ahmad, Craig Whyte, or any of the other characters in Rangers’ history. To my knowledge, I have never met them, nor had business dealings with them. Nor would I recognise them if I passed them on a street”

+++++++
Thing is naebudy would recognise them in the street these days, even thur mates, as they could only walk the streets of Glasgow is disguise 😀 oh struth !

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on2:39 pm - Dec 6, 2013


No1 Bob says: (63)
December 6, 2013 at 2:17 pm
1 0 Rate This

A Question.

Are all the Rangers Men now Bogey Men?

Or are only some of the Rangers Men now Bogey Men?

Or is it just Murray and his gang who are now Bogey Men?

Or are they all just Bogey’s?
———-

Past two years of board minutes reveal a horror story, yet Stockbridge is owed a debt of gratitude?

“I did not have relations with Charles Lewinsky … er … Charles Chateau … uh .. Green.”

Time for engagement with the fans ‘significant proposals’ to ‘engage’ them. Sounds like a new scheme to get the fans to part with their money.

Beware the Gang of Four 🙂

Funny stuff.

View Comment

No1 BobPosted on2:43 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Wikipedia has the following description:

“A bogeyman (also spelled bogieman, or boogeyman) is a mythical creature in many cultures used by adults to frighten children into compliant behaviour. The monster has no specific appearance, and conceptions about it can vary drastically from household to household within the same community; in many cases, he has no set appearance in the mind of an adult or child, but is simply a non-specific embodiment of terror. Parents may tell their children that if they misbehave, the bogeyman will get them. Bogeymen may target a specific mischief—for instance, a bogeyman that punishes children who suck their thumbs—or general misbehaviour, depending on what purpose needs serving. In some cases, the bogeyman is a nickname for the Devil.”

The term ‘bogeyman’ can now be used to frighten bears.

View Comment

davythelotionPosted on2:51 pm - Dec 6, 2013


upthehoops says: (704)
December 6, 2013 at 7:10 am
&&&&&&
Curiously, not one of the record breaker’s players have been identified as a potential target for another club (this includes the youngest old shareholder manager).

A question from the BTC/WTC, if an agent negotiated a ‘loan’ or payment additional to salary, how were they paid for this work?

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on2:52 pm - Dec 6, 2013


The statement that David Somers does not know anyone and would not know them if he met them in the street reminds of when my sister was trying to explain to my 5 year old nephew that he was not to talk to strangers.

“What’s a stranger?”
“It’s someone you don’t know”.
“But if I don’t know them, then how do I know they’re a stranger?”

Maybe David had better acquaint himself with the prior boards and charlatans – including Interpol Most Wanted – just so he knows that they are not associated anymore 😉

Plus – seems Chris and Jack are at it………

Chris Graham ‏@ChrisGraham76 57m
Open letter from Jack Irvine on the official site. Fascinating….

JackIrvine ‏@JackIrvine 50m
@ChrisGraham76 Actually it is all the chairman’s work smartass

Chris Graham‏@ChrisGraham76
@JackIrvine Top PR Jack. Keep up the good work….. #dinosaur

Cue popcorn…………….

View Comment

iceman63Posted on2:54 pm - Dec 6, 2013


The fundamental problem for Rangers fans is that with the apparent survival of liquidation which killed all other Scottish clubs – and the absence of any clarity on the issue from any of the relevant authorities , they have come to believe in the immortality of the club regardless of actions.
they simply do not believe that the consequence of any subsequent action can be the death of the club.
The SFA has foolishly allowed this perception to continue unchallenged, thus Rangers fans blithely talk of a second insolvency event as though such events were a natural part of the life cycle of the club. The failure to bring Rangers to heel, to hold them to account, to explain the true nature of the present club and the blind eye turning to any wrong-doing by anybody at Ibrox, be they player, official or fan has lent them a sense of invincibility akin to that of Shakespeare’s “Macbeth”

I am still expecting to see the head on a stick – not via justice, nor Football regulation, nor the moral judgement and indignation of an outraged media – but via cold, hard economic reality!.

View Comment

McCaig`s TowerPosted on2:58 pm - Dec 6, 2013


neepheid says: (917)
December 6, 2013 at 1:56 pm

Now that is desperate- behold, the end is nigh.
———————————————————————-
So the game’s a bogey, then?

BTW – two years’ of minutes??

View Comment

davythelotionPosted on3:02 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Danish Pastry says: (1770)
December 6, 2013 at 11:37 am
“One thing that did puzzle me was why they asked the press to leave at the start of the meeting yet proceeded to broadcast to the rest of the planet live on youtube.”
#######
This allows the ‘hear no evil, see no evil,’ defence currently being deployed by Scotland’s scribblers.

View Comment

Comments are closed.