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.
Spiers in the herald today (sorry, not good at links)
It was all going so well then
“Yesterday, in deciding that Lawwell had no case to answer, it took an amount of tut-tutting from Campbell Ogilvie, a disapproving SFA president, to bring closure to it all.”
That’s maybe what he wanted to do. Its my ball and if you’re not going to play to my rules then I’m going home kind of thing. They are the same club, they are they are they are!
I suspect. No, I truly hope that closure is certainly the one thing that it shouldn’t bring, certainly not on his terms which embarrassingly seemed to be the reasoning behind yesterday’s statement.
One thing that is clear. Jack I hope you’re reading. If you needed confirmation that your place man is now a busted flush then this was it. The very fact that he made a statement at all brought the magnifying glasses out. Exactly what your client(s) doesn’t need at the moment.
easyJambo says: (577)
November 23, 2013 at 8:57 am
So there we have Michael McLaughlin from Biggart Baillie and representing both Oldco and Newco arguing to LNS that Rangers ceased to be a club under SPL rules on 14th June. (I agree with that) Then we see that the SPL argues against its own rules that the club only ceased to be a member 40 days and 40 nights later on 3rd August. Even after the Newco’s request for the SPL share transfer was rejected on 4th July by the SPL clubs, the SPL still saw the club as a member for almost a month. Remember that this “SPL Club” had no ground, no players and was heading for liquidation after the rejection of the CVA and the sale of assets on 14th June.
It seems to me that the SPL was working to an agenda to keep a “Rangers” going no matter what.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
eJ
The reason for my “glass half empty” posture. No matter the staggeringly simple logic of almost any proposition which states the bleedin’ obvious that they are a new club, relentless MSM spin states the opposite without any justification. A position which is now implicitly (and officially) endorsed by Ogilvie in his response to Pater Lawwell’s naïve remarks at the Celtic AGM.
Intellectual argument is one of the first casualties in a war of spin, and the guys with the biggest guns get to write what becomes accepted as historical truth.
If the only constituency of interested parties lobbying for the bleedin’ obvious case is the Bampots, then despite the tens of thousands of bloggers who read tis site and others, they are but a drop in the fan fodder ocean brimful of people not known for their analytical skills.
If this OCNC scenario was as important to our clubs as it is to us, there would be no ambiguity, there would be no oxygen for the Spin to breathe. I simply conclude that our clubs as not as outraged as we are over this whole disgraceful and corrupt saga.
There is only one course of action possible for me to take given that conclusion, and that is to disengage from football as a significant part of my life.
That’s what gets me so angry. I miss going to football, but even if I renewed my SB tomorrow, it would NEVER be the same again for me. There are just not enough people who feel that way to become a significant factor in the calculations our clubs make, and hence force them to change course from the current passive and meek acquiescence to standing up for sporting integrity and fair play.
BP
Your OP was good but that statement
Big Pink says: (140)
November 23, 2013 at 9:30 am
Is outstanding.
Chappy-O or whatever it is these boggers say
Big Pink says: (140) November 23, 2013 at 9:30 am
I’m very much in the same boat myself. I didn’t renew the season ticket I’d had for 26 years in 2012/13, but I relented and responded to the appeal by Hearts administrators during the summer in order to save the club. Despite having a ST now, I won’t be going to every game.
I now watch many more youth and junior games that I do senior games and certainly don’t watch the SPFL coverage on Sky or BT Sport.
Playing catch up.Re the issue of whether Celtic fans would turn up for a match against a team from Govan.
I am a season ticket holder at Celtic Park but I’ll take a rain check on that one.There has been far too much damage wreaked upon our game by the power brokers at Edmiston Drive,aided and abetted by the soft shoe shufflers at Hampden and as a result,I refuse to give legitimacy to a match featuring a team who have absolutely no right to be playing football in any capacity in this country.
Esteban.You paint a rather rosy picture of supporters pre match rubbing shoulders in the pub,of a buzz about the place etc. Really? My recollection of the atmosphere prior to these games was one of unease and underlying fear.I do not,and will not miss these games.
BARTINBLOG
“The Future’s Bright”
bartinmain.wordpress.com/2013/11/23/the-futures-bright/
A few selected quotes from The Scotsman article:
And on the much-discussed wage issue:
To Palacio67,PM sent re ASA
Those in control inside Ibrox have played a blinder making sure the plan continues unabated by the likes of the Murray/ McColl posse to ensure nothing derails the primary objective – make wheans of cash while the going is good, with shares and assets tucked safely out of reach. The purchase of shares by Laxey has all but rubber stamped Green and Whyte cohorts are Teflon coated come the AGM. There may be a lot of uncomfortable questions for the new incumbents to answer, but they should be safe in the knowledge there is now the wherewithal percentage wise to scupper any ‘undesirables’ finding their way into a blazer and brogues. McCoist is now giving the discreet message of siding with the current board as he seeks stability to the turmoil. He is in that position of pulling anything other than the spivco line would be seen as mutinous by the board, and would find himself oot the door, albeit with a tidy thank you but on his managerial abilities to date where else would employ him for the funny money he’s on. I would also be sure the empty promises of war chests for the way ahead have smoothed his deliberations.
With the additional brogues under the boardroom table there will be considerable additional expenditure and these guys won’t come cheaply. They themselves will be doubtless aware of all the risks and dangers of being associated with a new club constantly in the headlines for unwanted reasons and a support openly opposed to anyone seen to be associated, however tenuously with Green or Whyte. However they will be no doubt be rewarded handsomely for their participation and lending erstwhile business acumen to a vilified board. The spivs have reinforced the barricades at the perfect time, the AGM pushed back to a date allowing unhindered control to Spivco, and the disparate and desperate Ibrox support can do nothing but howl at the moon, and of course, Mr Lawwell. The bushy tailed squirrel of a complaint by TRFC would have kept a large number of misguided supporters away from the more imminent and damaging issues of their club. Even the ‘old’ bone Mr Ogilvie threw his former minions at Ibrox calling them the same old club, but not challenging Lawwell for his jibe speaks volumes of the dichotomy that envelops the support. I guess Ogilivie can be said, unintentionally maybe, to laying the foundation to claim the £250,000 for SFA infringements by old co. For the brow beaten, fatigued Ibrox support, however, the damage is well and truly done. Their saviours in the shape of McColl and the Murray’s has proven a dead end. The Spivs have done what they are good at for this is what they do. They look after no.1. Nothing more, nothing less. Money is King. When the dust settles after the Xmas AGM, their ability to control the timing of events to sell the club/ shares and make their gold laden escape will come to fruition. It remains to be seen who will stump up the readies when that time comes. Doubtless, someone with someone else’s money.
Mu understanding of the much vaunted “ceased to be a club” line is related to the context of the “as defined in the Rules” phrase that is often left off by whoever’s quoting the line.
The definition in the rules, SPL rules that is, that is being specifically referred to includes the condition of being “eligible to participate in the SPL” or some such phrasing.
Taking this meaning into account, establishing “ceased to be a club” is more a question of eligibility/jurisdiction, which makes sense in the context of the actual dispute to which LNS was referring, rather than some generic certification of “death”.
LNS seems to share my interpretation, as is shown by a selection of some of the quotations of his decisions where continuity of Rangers FC – “the club” which he distinguishes explicitly from the two owning and operating companies – is explicit:
Page 2: “there is no allegation that the CURRENT OWNER AND OPERATOR OF THE CLUB, The Rangers Football Club Limited (Newco) …”
Page 4: “On 14 June 2012 a newly incorporated company, Sevco Scotland Limited, purchased substantially all the business and assets of Oldco, INCLUDING RANGERS FC..”
Page 4: “[Newco] BECAME THE OPERATOR OF RANGERS FC within the Third Division of the Scottish Football League”
Page 5: “Newco, as the CURRENT OWNER AND OPERATOR OF RANGERS FC, although not alleged…”
Page 6: “Rangers FC was liable to sanctions as provided by the Rules in the event of a breach WHILE [RANGERS FC] WAS OWNED AND OPERATED BY OLDCO”
Page 6: “…capable of affect Rangers FC as a CONTINUING ENTITY now owned and operated by Newco”
Page 32: “Oldco as a company, as distinct from the football management or players of Rangers FC as a club…”
Page 32: “Rangers FC is of course NOW OWNED And OPERATED BY NEWCO …”
Page 33: “…does not affect Rangers FC as a club UNDER ITS NEW OWNERSHIP.”
bryce9a says: (4)
November 23, 2013 at 2:57 am
13 0 Rate This
Reply to HirsutePursuit….
Where the 5 way agreement says:
“As the members of the SFL in general meeting have given approval to the SFL Resolution resulting in the admission of Sevco as an Associate Member of the SFL and the admission of Rangers FC to play in the Third Division of the Scottish Football League during season 2012/13 (at a minimum), the SFL irrevocably undertakes to take whatever steps are necessary on Completion to record Sevco as an Associate Member of the SFL in substitution for Dundee FC immediately following transfer of the Oldco Membership to Sevco from Oldco by the SFA and the registration by the SPL of the transfer of the Oldco Share to Dundee FC.”
Does that not suggest that Newco did not formally become SFL members until the August 3rd date when SPL shares were also switched and full transfer of SFA membership was completed?
====================================================================
No.
“As the members of the SFL in general meeting have given approval to the SFL Resolution resulting in the admission of Sevco as an Associate Member of the SFL..” is written in the past tense.
Sevco, at this time, have already been admitted as an associate member of the SFL.
https://web.archive.org/web/20121101141322/http://www.scottishfootballleague.com/news/article/press-statement-49/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/143196212/SFA-Articles-of-Association-2009
As I said in a previous post, the SPL had painted themselves into a corner by refusing to call a general meeting after the old club went into liquidation.
If Charles Green had refused to hand over the SPL share (remember he was acting for Old Rangers in SPL meetings) until after a General Meeting had voted upon a Qualified Resolution – which he would have been entitled to do – the start of the season would have been turmoil.
The reference in the 5-way agreement – as I read it – is simply saying that Dundee will be released from their SFL membership to join the SPL and the SFL will take whatever steps are necessary to re-organise the leagues – with the new club having a place in (at least) Division 3.
Big Pink says: (140)
November 23, 2013 at 8:54 am
The incident also puts to bed the idea that Celtic have remained silent up to now in order that the flames are not fanned. Celtic have remained silent up to now because bizarrely, despite the evidence of the past year, they actually think their own interests are best served by that Old Rivalry being re-ignited.
———————————————————————————————————————————————–
I can think of one area where they may consider Rangers presence in the Scottish Premiership to be beneficial – country co-efficient ranking points make up 20% (33% before 2009) of cub champions league ranking points.
Outwith Celtic and Rangers successful European runs by scottish clubs have been rare.
It may be that Celtic feel that they have the finacial firepower to dominate the league on Rangers return but that the addition of a club that, if properly run, should make the group stages of the Europa League, would boost the national co-efficient sufficiently to eliminate a qualifying stage (and in conjunction with their own efforts even possibly propel Scotland to the magical 12th spot and automatic qualification for the CL group stages , in the long term!)
It’s also worth bearig in mind that if a European league were ever set up under Uefa’s auspices then intial entry might well be based on the co-eficient system.
slimshady61 says: (305)
November 23, 2013 at 1:02 am
42 0 Rate This
On the Upper Tier Tribunal, what has to be remembered is that in 14 years of EBT litigation, the UTT in February will mark the very first time that an EBT case has ever been taken to a second tier court of law.
54 (days to pay day)
***********************************
The smart money appears to be on the UTT adopting the dissenting opinion of the FTT and thus reversing the verdict. If they take the line ‘Aye right Dr Poon, fair enough, it wiz wages, not loans’, where does that leave us? For clarity, by ‘us’ I am referring to the Scottish Football community, bampots included.
I for one will be thinking, or shouting, ‘I knew they were at it!’. Will we then see the pursuit of directors, beneficiaries, recipients of the price of a ‘good night out’ for back taxes? What will the SFA, SPFL, MSM make of it all? Another ‘we need to move on’ clarion call?
Armageddon? it bloody well should be!!
Also, I would like to know the views of all on here on what will (would) be the ramifications for the team currently playing out of Ibrox.
54 (apologies) to 0 (Sorry Slim)
Toby,
On Ogilvie laying the foundation for the £250k claim, I think this particular chapter has been (as others have said) simply a device to nail a “Same Club” sign on TRFC. “They paid the old club’s debts, therefore they must be …..”
As far as TRFC’s ability to compete financially and on the park with the top three or four Premiership teams is concerned; I think the spivs and the brogues have given up on that in the short term.
The SFA’s position is I think concerned primarily and exclusively with maintaining the existence of not just “A Rangers”, but “The Rangers”. As long as that perception of continuity is preserved, the long game can be taken care of by the successor brogues.
Even if we were to accept that as an understandable position by the clubs in keeping alive the Rangers marketplace, none of this does anything to address the fact that laws have been broken, rules have been ignored, lies have been told, and that responsibility has been abandoned by those in power.
In short, nothing of this “solution” which has allowed a new club to join the SFA at an inappropriate competitive level, and simultaneously pretend to be something else, prevents EXACTLY the same thing to happen again. And nothing gives us the confidence that ANYTHING these people at Hampden come up with could pass the slightest scrutiny, given the systematically corrupt way they have behaved.
bryce9a says: (5)
November 23, 2013 at 10:53 am
============================
Several months ago I asked for opinions on why LNS ignored Articles 2 and 4 of the SPL’s Articles of Association.
Any views??
BartinMain @ 10:12
Is this BartinMain Newco ?
Big Pink says: (141)
November 23, 2013 at 11:08 am
1 0 Rate This
On Ogilvie laying the foundation for the £250k claim, I think this particular chapter has been (as others have said) simply a device to nail a “Same Club” sign on TRFC. “They paid the old club’s debts, therefore they must be …..”
——
BP, completely agree. The decision to pursue the £250k would have been nothing to do with Ogilivie in the first place. It would be an unfortunate pill for them to swallow given cash resources are dwindling so quickly. But one could argue the two semi finals at Ibrox is to mitigate this. But his intention without a doubt is to nail his colours to the Ibrox mast (they’ve never been in doubt, anyway) with the ‘they are the same old club’ pish.
parttimearab says: (71)
November 23, 2013 at 11:00 am
I can think of one area where they may consider Rangers presence in the Scottish Premiership to be beneficial – country co-efficient ranking points make up 20% (33% before 2009) of cub champions league ranking points.
Outwith Celtic and Rangers successful European runs by scottish clubs have been rare.
It may be that Celtic feel that they have the finacial firepower to dominate the league on Rangers return but that the addition of a club that, if properly run, should make the group stages of the Europa League, would boost the national co-efficient sufficiently to eliminate a qualifying stage (and in conjunction with their own efforts even possibly propel Scotland to the magical 12th spot and automatic qualification for the CL group stages , in the long term!)
It’s also worth bearig in mind that if a European league were ever set up under Uefa’s auspices then intial entry might well be based on the co-eficient system.
________________________________________________________________________________
Fair point pta, but OCNC status makes no difference to that scenario. I don’t think there are many on here, given the ethos of this blog, who would object to a well-run club out of Ibrox competing at the top within the rules, the law and its means. The problem is that the authorities have sought to do help them achieve that by breaking rules and pretending that black is white.
HirsutePursuit says: (441)
November 23, 2013 at 11:09 am
0 1 Rate This
bryce9a says: (5)
November 23, 2013 at 10:53 am
============================
Several months ago I asked for opinions on why LNS ignored Articles 2 and 4 of the SPL’s Articles of Association.
Any views??
=============================
Any views on why LNS chose an adversarial system rather than a inquisitorial system for his “enquiry”?
Both of my questions are related. ❗
Greenock Jack says: (170)
November 23, 2013 at 11:14 am
BartinMain @ 10:12
Is this BartinMain Newco ?
____________________________________________________
🙂
On the living wage issue
This is a generalised comment and probably has little actual significance wrt to football club staff but it is important when looking at the living wage issue which I support in principle.
Big Pink @ 8:54am
After pinching myself several times, I find that am indeed in total agreement with you Jack 🙂 Staggeringly that extends to your later remarks on the Living Wage issue. 🙁
Despite the natural inclination of many Celtic fans to defend PL’s remarks and by extension their club (ironically an inclination that many see as a character defect when expressed by Rangers fans), I think that flippant comment is a poor substitute for a proper commentary on a situation over which Celtic have hitherto remained silent. By hiding behind the “joke”, he sidestepped the substantive issue, and walked straight into Campbell Ogilvie’s k.o. punch contradiction (the now official affirmation that Celtic and Sevco are “Old Rivals”)
The incident also puts to bed the idea that Celtic have remained silent up to now in order that the flames are not fanned. Celtic have remained silent up to now because bizarrely, despite the evidence of the past year, they actually think their own interests are best served by that Old Rivalry being re-ignited.
Where I differ from you Jack is that I think you also subscribe to that theory, whilst I reject it out of hand.
——————————————————————————————–
I’m not quite sure what theory you believe that I subscibe towards.
To try and clarify, I believe that the precise PL remark was more opportunist than pre-meditated although the general tactic may have been considered prior to the meeting.
If in Glasgow either Rangers or Celtic make a public remark on the other then it is done in the full knowledge that it will become an issue and dependent on content has the potential to dominate the headlines and put other matters in the shade. That’s Glasgow, that’s how it’s always been.
It reflects badly on those it is aimed at in that they become easier to manipulate due to the predictability of reaction, no matter the facts.
Peter Lawwell tends to chose his words carefully, so I can’t seriously consider he didn’t realise where this would go. However I do believe that the opportunist remark was made for short-term ‘gain’ and that the subsequent fall-out hasn’t entirely gone to plan.
Greenock Jack @ 11:46 AM says
If in Glasgow either Rangers or Celtic make a public remark on the other then it is done in the full knowledge that it will become an issue and dependent on content has the potential to dominate the headlines and put other matters in the shade.
===================================================
I’m sorry, but that is nonsense. When David Murray made his fiver/tenner quote it was received in quite glorious terms by the media with no criticism whatsover. It is only these past two years it has received any media scrutiny as they watched their club implode. Likewise most of what Charles Green said was simply re-printed verbatum with no criticism, and he tried to involve Celtic a few times. Nothing Green ever said, even when accusing the SFA/SPL of stealing from his club, attracted a statement from Campbell Ogilvie.
The reaction to Lawell’s quote tells us everything we need to know about how Celtic are still regarded. Basically the club are regarded as upstarts who would do well to remember their place.
HirsutePursuit says: (442)
November 23, 2013 at 11:28 am
Good questions and both are related. Until quite recently I held the view, that once Mr Bryson made is ridiculous, and unchallenged statement, that once invalid registrations were accepted, they became, er, valid, that LNS had no choice but to rule as he did.
I am no longer quite so sure of that. An inquisitorial process would have ensured that all the evidence was tested by the LNS panel, rather than relying on counsel to challenge, and counter challenge.
As much as it pains may to say it, but maybe the conspiracy theorists are right. I have never understood why Mr Bryson’s statement went unchallenged, if it was a surprise, counsel could have asked for and gotten an adjournment.
There is a bad smell about all of this.
UTHps @ 12:03
You don’t seem to understand the point I’m making in the paragraph you quote, it wasn’t ‘party political’.
It was more about a method that clubs can use to control the agenda which is usually perceived by receiving support as positive, where in fact it is usually the reverse.
Good Afternoon.
Getting ready to go to game.
With reference to the 5 way agreement it mentions quiete clearly that the SPL would do their best to do what they could to accommodate “SEVCO”. Had they been known as something else then that name would have been used.i.e. if they were “Rangers” they would have been referred to as such in that document.
That entity changed their name to Rangers football club ltd
Therefore they cannot be the same “Rangers” founded in the 1890’s.
They can cling to whatever ideology they want but the fact is that they are not and never have been the same club.
Ogilvie’s statement should have been directed at the Sevco board as they were the ones who caused the waste of time.
Personally I think the oldco/newco has been done to death. They think it is we think it’s not. It will eventually be resolved by events which are yet to come and then we can all move on.
The future is bright, the future is Green and Whyte because I believe that these two are still the players behind it all and this will eventually come out.
What we should be concentrating on is ways in which we can convince our clubs to get rid of the train crash that is the SFA and replace it with a body fit for purpose.
The game needs to be governed by people who are really interested in the good of the game and not in flag waving for a lost cause while filling their own pockets at our expense.
In my opinion those of us who know they are a new company and club will never convince those who will not believe and we should concentrate on trying to change what we can.
A concerted effort by all decent fans to get rid of those in the SFA who are not fit to govern our game should become the focus of our efforts.
Off now for another round of Armageddon.
scapaflow says: (1148)
November 23, 2013 at 12:15 pm
0 0 Rate This
HirsutePursuit says: (442)
November 23, 2013 at 11:28 am
Good questions and both are related. Until quite recently I held the view, that once Mr Bryson made is ridiculous, and unchallenged statement, that once invalid registrations were accepted, they became, er, valid, that LNS had no choice but to rule as he did.
I am no longer quite so sure of that. An inquisitorial process would ensured that all the evidence was tested by the LNS panel, rather than relying on counsel to challenge, and counter challenge.
As much as it pains may to say it, but maybe the conspiracy theorists are right. I have never understood why Mr Bryson’s statement went unchallenged, if it was a surprise, counsel could have asked for and gotten an adjournment.
There is a bad smell about all of this.
===================================================
LNS saw it coming a mile off, and – rather than refuse to take the enquiry – simply made sure that he had no decision to make on such a controversial (but “uncontested”) matter.
For purely commercial reasons, the SPL (Neil Doncaster) was first to peddle the lie that the ethereal non-legal-entity thingy (“Club”) could pass from an OldCo to a NewCo. The joint council for old & new Rangers gratefully accepted the SPL’s premise – only really disputing the degree to which the new “company” could be held responsible for the actions of the old.
The LNS enquiry made its ruling based only on the evidence as it was presented to them. An adversarial system, by its very nature, makes sure that agreed evidence cannot be contradicted by the inconvenient facts that both sides of the “argument” would choose to ignore.
HirsutePursuit says: (443)
November 23, 2013 at 12:48 pm
In so doing LNS did a huge dis-service to Football. This entire episode, is a non-stop round of short term decisions taken to resolve immediate problems, with no thought given to the long term consequences.
This has resulted in the creation of a series of much more severe, intractable problems, the complete loss of trust in the Authorities, and the trashing of the reputations of ALL involved.
scapaflow says: (1149)
November 23, 2013 at 12:57 pm
0 0 Rate This
HirsutePursuit says: (443)
November 23, 2013 at 12:48 pm
In so doing LNS did a huge dis-service to Football. This entire episode, is a non-stop round of short term decisions taken to resolve immediate problems, with no thought given to the long term consequences.
This has resulted in the creation of a series of much more severe, intractable problems, the complete loss of trust in the Authorities, and the trashing of the reputations of ALL involved.
=================================================
Indeed 🙁
At the time (18th May 2012), most of us laughed and thought Neil Doncaster had lost the plot when we read this:
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/latest/rangers-takeover-doncaster-reveals-newco-could-escape-spl-exit-1-2302872
In hindsight, you might be forgiven for thinking he had written Lord Nimmo Smith’s report. 😳
http://www.scribd.com/doc/143094729/spl-commission-reasons-for-decision-of-12-september-2012
http://www.scribd.com/doc/143094725/SPL-Commission-Decision-28-02-2013
Hirsute & Scapa
I’ve said this before but it’s general relevance and importance demands that I continue to repeat it.
If you want real change and accountability in the way the corporate / judicial / political / mediatic function and interact then you have to start at the very top. The last couple of decades have seen society go down a dark and dangerous road.
What happens at the ‘top’ sets the tone and actually serves to protect others who employ similar methods or tactics.
jimlarkin says: (649)
November 23, 2013 at 1:05 pm
9 1 Rate This
On Off The Ball today
. . . Stuart bottled it – regarding OcNc.
Tam also, but we knew he would anyway.
Smudger was on and was allowed to spout it was the company not the club that went bust.
Boooooooooooooring.
Thank fcuk i don’t have to speak to these people face to face in a private conversation.
Spineless and amoeba type brains.
I don’t think i’ll tune in to that off the ball p1sh anymore !
—————————————
I fear Stuart has been ‘got at’ which is sad.
Far less controversial or searching recently.
Maybe his BBC bosses have had a word 😐
Now that Ogilvie has decided to use his vocal chords he should not be allowed to lose them again ,there are too many questions and he is the custodian of the answers ,are there any takers of this opportunity for some hack[s] to redeem themselves ,thought not.
meant to add, had a beer with the poor sod from the local junior team who goes to SFA meetings. We were talking about the current situation, he said that his impression was that the SFA were of the view, that since everyone was upset with them, they must have made the best decision they could in the circumstances.
Tossers, complete bloody tossers!
Greenock Jack says: (173)
November 23, 2013 at 1:26 pm
Hirsute & Scapa
I’ve said this before but it’s general relevance and importance demands that I continue to repeat it.
If you want real change and accountability in the way the corporate / judicial / political / mediatic function and interact then you have to start at the very top. The last couple of decades have seen society go down a dark and dangerous road.
What happens at the ‘top’ sets the tone and actually serves to protect others who employ similar methods or tactics.
———————————————————————————————
A laudible sentiment GJ but in real life people like us don’t have the firepower to tackle the people at the top directly.
So we have to fight at a much lower level to show the rotteness and corruption that is endemic in many parts of society especially when we have a gutless MSM – by and large – that won’t expose what is being done to us – usually secretly and for our ‘own good’ – by our ‘superiors’.
Obviously that means it’s harder for us and will take longer to achieve our ends but we can only fight-back with the tools and abilities we have. We can’t afford to hire PR or Lobby specialists or run a highly expensive media advertising campaign. All we have is the knowledge that we are in the right and aren’t corrupt although The Establishment is skilled at turning active shop stewards into managers so we will always face the potential problem of losing our best activists.
And many just get worn-out by the struggle and their own life, family and job has to come first. So not easy and no real guarantee of success. Just an unending grind with a sure personal conviction that when you are no longer unable to carry the banner of truth and justice that someone will be there to pick it up and carry on fighting the dark forces.
I have here a yellow wrapper.
It used to contain a Cadbury’s Flake.
The Flake is gone now – consumed.
I’m thinking of putting a links sausage in the yellow wrapper –
one of those long thin ones,
so that to look at it,
anyone would think it was a genuine Cadbury’s Flake,
and then send it to Mr Ogilvie at the SFA.
My purpose is that if Mr Ogilvie is a clever man
as everyone says he is,
then when he opens the fake Flake
he will know, in his knower, what it stands for.
(Just in case, I’ll enclose a note of explanation).
He may, in the nano-second following,
dismiss the flake as a prank perpetrated by a bampot
and quickly revert to his default mind set re OCNC.
But, he will not be able to remove the truth
which has entered his mind a few seconds previously.
And should he receive not one, but many fake flakes,
(should the idea catch on ? )
he will most certainly remember the day
he thought he was in chocolate heaven
when in fact he was dealing with a load of fakes.
.
TRFC – a sausage pretending to be a Flake.
Eco @ 2.04
I understand what you say and agree with much of it.
The ‘little people’ have more power than they realise but it needs to be collectivelly well organised.
The powers that be realise this and employ pre-emptive counter measures, one of which is to convince them that they are effectivelly powerless, if they feel a need to promote this then it suggets that the opposite is true.
Why this conversation has relevance on this blog is that if those involved within the micro, understood better it’s place within the macro, then energies and focus may cumulatively achieve more.
Greenock Jack says: (174)
November 23, 2013 at 2:23 pm
Unfortunately, one of the I am sure, intended consequences of all this has been to increase the already bitter divide among the fans. There is no prospect of any group of Ranger’s fans working with any group of non Ranger’s fans to bring about change and vice versa.
Having said that, there is not much prospect of getting a untied Ranger’s fan view of anything anyway, but that’s a different problem….
Scapa @ 2:32
I would agree and have already pointed toward the situation/divide in Glasgow being used as a tool by many different collectives to suit a particular given agenda.
I thought the PL remark a good mini example in that it served a purpose for both PL/CelticPLC whilst at the same time being jumped upon by Irvine/Rangers to divert attention from the spivs.
So you have the clubs themselves using the divide and the known lack of objectivity from both sets of supporters to their advantage. The losers being the fans, who engage in the predictable tribal confrontations, whilst focus on what may be considered as the real issues fades.
Note the role of the media as facilitators and beneficiaries.
From the Rangers’ accounts, and specifically in relation to deferred tax.
============================
20. DEFERRED TAX
At the balance sheet date, the Group has unused tax losses of £3,772,000 available for offset against future profits. No deferred tax asset has been recognised as it is not considered probable that there will be future taxable profits available in the foreseeable future to utilise the losses.
====================================
Forgive me, but does that actually mean what it appears to say in plain English. The Rangers board predict that the PLC will, at the very best, run at a break even for the foreseeable future. And that their auditors agree with that position.
It’s hardly surprising, I know, but seeing it their in their own accounts seems to make it more stark.
Manandboy 2.09
Are you saying there is a link between the Flake & C.Ogilvie
Al get ma coat
Heavily conflicted Ogilvie accuses Celtic in Rory Bremner farce
Date: 22nd November 2013 at 7:36 pm
Written by: Joe McHugh | Comments (25)
After years of hiding in the bunker at Hampden heavily conflicted SFA President Campbell Ogilvie has found his voice to criticise the Rory Bremner comment made by Peter Lawwell at last week’s Celtic AGM.
Ogilvie, a former director of Rangers (In Liquidation), beneficiary of the EBT Scheme and architect of the Discount Option Scheme, known as the ‘wee tax case’ decided to leap on the favoured bandwagon of comparing Sevco and Celtic as two sides of the same coin.
It seems that the president of the SFA has no concept of liquidation despite helping Rangers on that path under the disastrous leadership of Dave Murray before switching to Hearts where Vladimir Romanov took the Edinburgh institution into administration with liquidation a near certainty.
Having kept his thoughts to himself throughout the administration and liquidation of his beloved Rangers Ogilvie roared into action tonight on the SFA website.
He said: ”This week, the Scottish FA’s Compliance Officer has reviewed comments made by the Celtic Chief Executive, Peter Lawwell, at the club’s Annual General Meeting, after receiving an official letter of complaint from Rangers Football Club.
“The Compliance Officer has informed both clubs that there is no actionable breach of the rules. None the less, I am compelled to convey my disappointment that we find ourselves in this position, as a result of an apparent erosion of mutual respect between two of our oldest rivals.
“At a time when Scottish football faces challenges on many fronts, it is incumbent on our biggest clubs to set the highest standards. In this regard both the comments made, and the subsequent time, effort and resource imposed on our Compliance Officer to deal with the complaint, were wholly unnecessary.”
For the benefit of Ogilvie Celtic and the current club playing out of Ibrox are not sporting rivals- they have never played at a senior level.
Once he gets to grips with the reality that football merit is decided on the pitch rather than by denying HMRC money in order to attract a better standard of player Ogilvie will have a chance of leading Scottish football forward from the self inflicted ‘challenges on many fronts.
The Rangers Ogilvie remembers, will be the club of Murray and Donald Findlay, Dick Advocaat, Alex McLeish, Tore Andre Flo and Christian Nerlinger.
As a Rangers (In Liquidation) director he sat at the top table of various AGM’s as Findlay played to the gallery with quips about Celtic as they struggled financially while paying PAYE and National Insurance for the good of the country. And who will ever forget Murray’s claim that for every fiver Celtic spend Rangers will spend ten- the economics that led to Whyte and liquidation.
That Rangers died a death in June 2012 as the fans sat on their hands and blue nosed billionaires looked the other way when it came to putting their hands in their pockets to save their beloved institution.
As he thumbs through the rule book at Hampden and plots his next junket, probably to the World Cup draw in Brazil next month, Ogilvie ought to give some thought to the many clubs throughout Scotland that live within their means and pay their way.
Perhaps publishing the highly secretive ‘Five Way Agreement’ that fast tracked Sevco into senior football would give Ogilvie and his colleagues at the SFA the platform to meet the current challenges facing the game.
Claims that Celtic and the current club from Ibrox are ‘two of our oldest rivals” is as accurate as the accounts Ogilvie used to sign of as a Rangers (In Liquidation) director during the glory days of Murray.
Those days are over, hopefully Ogilvie’s place on the gravy train funded by Celtic are also about to come to a shuddering halt.
(Recognition and thanks to the videocelts website from which this article was taken)
Future “taxable” profits (which can be manipulated via a number of accounting tricks involving non-cash expense write downs). But yes, that’s essentially how I’d read it.
CanuckBhoy says:
=============================
Thanks for that.
So a loss making business for the foreseeable future with no known line of credit will be having a share issue to raise funds just to keep itself going.
Or a loss making business for the foreseeable future will be seeking a line of credit, just to keep itself going.
Neither seems particularly likely to me.
Asset sales, or fleecing the fans again seem to be the only possibilities.
Rangers impact on the coefficient:
Let’s nip this one in the bud straight away. There are at most 6 years when Rangers’ (either of them) are of any use at all to anyone other than themselves and Celtic.
If the new club dies, there will be a total of 5 years when the old club’s coefficient helps Scottish clubs in Europe (the last year of which they basically contributed sweet FA) and then there’s one year when Hearts benefited from finishing ahead of them in the league.
Since 1992, EVERY other year, Rangers’ contribution to the coefficient only helped Rangers – and (when they win the league) Celtic.
For every other club, contribution to the coefficient will have less of an impact than having a team playing in a Rangers shirt using up one of the European places available to Scottish clubs.
If the new club survives, this situation will only begin again.
In the last 10 years, even the national team’s performance and therefore coefficient suffered when media pressure disrupted support for non “Rangers men” as managers and/or forced the selection of a lot of Rangers players many of whom have proven selfish and disruptive.
This is not a club who’s presence benefits Scottish football in general. They do not contribute they consume. They generate neither money nor players of their own.
Here is what I have written to Mr R C Ogilvie.
It’s about the only direct action that I can take, and I have no expectation that his brazen soul , black as the earl of hell’s waistcoat as it may be, will be in the least moved to comply with my request.
It is far removed psychologically from men like him-essentially weak apparatchiks- to concede that they have erred.
Such men know not the meaning of the word ‘repentance’.
And accordingly remove themselves from the scope of forgiveness or reconciliation.
I fervently hope for his early fall from grace, when all his personal honours will turn to ashes in his mouth.
(I have, of course, used my real name and address on the letter, which I will post tomorrow.)
“Mr R C Ogilvie,
President,
Scottish Football Association,
6th Floor, Hampden Park,
Glasgow, G42 9AY
Dear Mr Ogilvie,
I am writing to say that I think you long ago ought to have resigned from the office of President of the SFA because you have been too deeply associated personally with the manifold failings of RFC(IL) as any kind of sporting entity, and, ex officio, implicated in the irregular award of SFA membership to a new club falsely claiming unbroken connection with RFC(IL).
You know the truth.
The Scottish Press and BBC Radio Scotland know the truth, although they dishonourably and shamelessly choose to ignore it.
Do the honourable thing now and resign, instead of remaining in post to add to your discredit by misusing your office to further propagate a complete factual inaccuracy.
RIFC plc is not an ‘old rival’ of any other club. It is merely an illicit ‘new’ rival to the teams in Scottish League 1.
And partisan statements by you to the contrary can be seen as baleful, disgraceful and manipulative attempts to maintain the fiction that a club you helped to die in shame is somehow still alive.
Yours sincerely,
……..”
“
In light of Messrs Ogilvie and Regan’s re-emergence following one club’s CEO making a comment about another club at their AGM, why was there no comment about respect when one chairman openly accused the SFA of corruption? The two are at opposite ends of the spectrum but I suspect the SFA chose to ignore the wrong comment – unless they agreed with it, of course.
Well said John.
This “great football administrator” has had 3 significant senior positions in Scottish football. At Rangers, at Hearts and at the SFA.
He is not a great football administrator, he is an abject failure.
The fact that he is willing to propagate lies, and to preside over an organisation which has bent and broken it’s own rules to help one club make him as corrupt as he is incompetent.
He should do the honourable thing … he wont.
paulonotini says: (39)
November 23, 2013 at 10:44 am
3 0 Rate This
To Palacio67,PM sent re ASA
—————————————
PM’d you my @mail address, already sent response today, challenging the separate club/ company issue, the biggest flaw imo. I still have her mail from previous correspondence so I could compose another with your input.
Although absolutely gutted by the final score from Celtic Park this afternoon (I was listening in the car, and just beginning to think we may finally take a point), I find it at least a little heartening to see the match stats on the BBC website … a total of 1 yellow card, 5 fouls by Celtic and only 1 by Aberdeen.
If that’s correct – not bad behaviour in what could have been a fairly high pressure game.
Angus
I’ve heard of trying to look on the bright side of life, but for a football supporter is that not a step too far ? 😯
A while later,
Edit: With the unaminous TU/TD on the related posts, there is a short Monty Python sketch somewhere in this.
Initially i thought..What is all the fuss on the new club debate ?..because i think fans the world over when a disaster strikes their club and liquidation happens and they then come back .most will never think of their club other than in their natural affectionate terms …In other words ..what is in their hearts ….NOTHING ever will change that for any of us …
but the more you think about the current scenario????..hymmmnnn!
The OCNC debate in this particular instance however when you look closely at it IS actually very fundamental ..It is a critical component part of the overall wider myth being perpetrated on the Scottish public in general and football fans In particular on the overall RFC scandal ..so it is very different
There are very important points long debated on here that tend to be forgotten in this particular narrow debate ..and which i think have got to be constantly making abundantly clear to the media And public at large ..well beyond this tiny blog until the real story is fully exposed.
1. Everyone knows RFC EVADED ..(.NOT AVOIDED….big big difference ) tax ..BREAKING the law..I couldn’t care less how the UTT ends up…I know and we all know what they did and so do they!..so they had access to cash spent on players while the rest of us and our wee clubs paid our PAYE and NHI contributions..tens of millions not paid
2 In so cheating the rest of Scottish football they then garnered tens upon tens of millions of pounds of prize money over many years ..depriving other Scottish clubs access to those funds as well as league trophies and cups ..including various wee clubs ….all of that was then recycled and spent on players etc
3 If that wasn’t enough they then borrow (we will never know the number syphoned out of MIM into Rangers but it is recognised to be ) well over one hundred million from banks which after debt to equity conversions by LLOyds in MIM and subsequent equity write offs mean that the general public .ie .you me everyone also big time paid for Rangers wages and titles etc ….We paid for it ..not Murray ..not Rangers…US
4 they then don’t pay their trade creditors and normal BAU PAYE / NHI under Mr Whyte and the agreed wee tax bills etc ..again tens of millions
The only private investment monies I am aware of that were made and have been also written off is the ENIC / King money ( assuming King didn’t actually get it back from MIM)..say another £50m
So when the argument goes about same club .it can’t be same club tell that to the creditors …which is a very fair point …BUT ..it isnt ‘just some trade creditors ‘ being stiffed which is bad enough..This is hundreds of millions of pounds of debt left trailing in their wake ..probably all wasted completely spent chasing the European dream ..paid largely by the rest of us
So …..Leaving aside the more recent and probable illegal recycling of the recent IPO monies back to ticketus and the various international financial gangsters …This club which has spent and lost literally hundreds of millions of public funds ,other clubs prize money and wee company creditors money..wants to airbrush this all away ..and pretend to stay in business as the same entity….AND while they are at it refuse to make their assets in any way available to those creditors and (via HMRC ) we the public
The Scottish establishment particularly the SFA is not only allowing this to happen ..they appear to be cheering them on
This is absolutely disgusting ..and as some on this blog have said repeatedly ..scale wise ..it is the biggest sporting scandal ever anywhere and it is effectively being covered up ..and this cover up is being perpetuated and validated very strongly by this same club myth
I’ve said it before on here as nauseam BDO have got to lay this all bare in all this detail..and get the physical assets back ..or they too will be part of the cover up..
How anyone particularly the current president of the SFA ,having been very complicit in a lot of this ,can remain in office never mind criticise one of the victims for opening their mouth on this however obliquely…is beyond parody.
Whilst any of the complete nonsense of the myth is being perpetrated and accepted as fact .(ie .there was no cheating, debt was under control,Craig whytes was the only problem ..switch to SEVCO Scotland was OK ,.definitely same club ..blah blah blah)..any of it at all …then it has to be counter challenged with force with all these facts and numbers . ( btw I am not saying I am completely accurate here .feel free to .shoot me down on the absolute actuals )
So That is why this ocnc debate is actually key ….Don’t concede any of the fundamental points ..until this complete scandal in totality is exposed from top to bottom …particularly the SFA’s complicity in it which is what we care about ..Scottish football can not rest or go forward in peace with what we all want ie a fair level playing field for all
If it is another Hillsborough and takes 20 years so be it !
Aye, a wee step maybe, Jack – but although we’re not unused to losing goals in the last few minutes to teams from Glasgow I, in common with many of ovine persuasion I’m sure, thought today might yield some kind of result. A point would have been more than acceptable.
In the event, it took me that long to even look up the match report – and a chap has to look for some positives at the end of the day! 🙂 Today gave me a small taste of what Bayern fans must have felt in that European final against Man Utd.
Sic transit fitba.
Regarding an idea expressed in the main article post, I do not agree the SFA have been “silent” on the old club new club debate. A distinction between Rangers FC and it’s owner/operator – whether oldco or newco – has been there consistently since the start.
Even when the whole membership transfer thing was ongoing, the SFA CEO was making statements referring to Newco as “the new owners of Rangers”. Statements referring to “Rangers FC’s administration” and, in the next breath,…”the club’s status has been confirmed by the SPL and SFL, we will consider the award of transfer once Rangers FC satisfy the necessary criteria.” Again, not saying “just to be clear Rangers are the same club!” but the implication is clear.
It’s no secret that the “no to newco” scuppered the plans of the SFA/SPL and so it is quite understandable, from their point of view, that they wouldn’t want to court more controversy by creating headline-grabbing soundbytes about “same club”, “history remains” etc. The other SPL clubs – who would be most hit by any boycotts by furious fans – would also want the sting taken out of things as much as possible.
Recall that the SFL had shown Rangers status as the same club on their website from the beginning, something they wouldn’t have done if it contradicted the SFA’s official stance. Tom English reporting the conversations the ECA had with the SFA about Rangers status, again, contradicting any notion of silent neutrality by the governing body on the OCNC ‘debate’.
They chose a middle way, provide enough info for anyone whose eyes were open to be aware of Rangers’ status, but not make affirmative moves to end the ‘debate’ as a specially-called press conference on “Rangers’ history” could have done.
Would coming out and stating “the club continues, the history is retained” have brought demonstrations to the door of Hampden? Boycotts of matches by SPL fans? Or would it just have blown over after a couple of weeks and the ‘wounds’ have healed much better as a result? Not an easy question to answer.
Rangers are not a new club.They (old co) were a company called rangers football club .Legally a club can not be liquidated,but the members are joint and severally liabill (cant spell) for money owed . A club can not be a limited company and a company can not be a club .Because a company has club in it,s name does not make it a club.I know UFA say a club is the entity that plays football,because we are used to calling them football clubs.If rangers had been a club the members would have to pay the creditors .UFA knows this by saying rangers last game was a 4-0 win against st johnstone. If they ever get into Europe there will be two rangers on the web site.Come to think of it there are 2 rangers just now (the liquidation not yet complete ).
bryce9a says: (6)
November 23, 2013 at 9:41 pm
0 3 Rate This
———
A lot of people use ‘Rangers’ when referring to ‘The Rangers’ (Sevco). I think most people are clued up as to the difference.
Personally, I don’t have a problem with a new club continuing the heritage of the previous club, but claiming to be the same one, now debt free, is shameful. I honestly don’t know why fans would want to do that. It’s embarrassing.
There’s not a lot anyone can do if the legal eagles from BDO let them phoenix in this way, but the continued insistence on being same debt-dodging club with what look like compromised titles will leave them disrespected by a whole generation of neutral fans. To them ‘The Rangers’ will just be plain old Sevco.
john clarke says: (1388)
November
Here is what I have written to Mr R C Ogilvie.
“….black as the earl of hell’s waistcoat….”
=====================================================================
JC….a phrase often used by my late mother (RIP)…which she would use so often in a benevolent context to describe such a malevolent situation as this “great administrator” has placed the game which we all loved and grew up with!
Oh me miserum!
But thanks for the memory…of me old mammy of course!
‘For every fiver….’ No complaint. Why? Because although it was offensive to Celtic supporters who were in the process of investing in their club whilst being derided by the MSM, on Jack’s instruction, for the biscuit tin mentality when it came to signing and paying players, it wasn’t treated as an offensive comment because it was gleefully reported by the msm.
The company which owns sevco were offended by PL’s ‘Rory Brenner can pretend to be Tony Blair’ yet the company is happy to assume the facade of a club without paying, amongst others, the face painter. Rory Brenner never had to take responsibility for sexed up reports of WMD, sevco have never taken responsibility for AMD (accounts of mass destruction).
Tailothebank says: (51)
November 23, 2013 at 8:21 pm
Initially i thought..What is all the fuss on the new club debate ?..because i think fans the world over when a disaster strikes their club and liquidation happens and they then come back .most will never think of their club other than in their natural affectionate terms …In other words ..what is in their hearts ….NOTHING ever will change that for any of us …
but the more you think about the current scenario????..hymmmnnn!
The OCNC debate in this particular instance however when you look closely at it IS actually very fundamental ..It is a critical component part of the overall wider myth being perpetrated on the Scottish public in general and football fans In particular on the overall RFC scandal ..so it is very different
There are very important points long debated on here that tend to be forgotten in this particular narrow debate ..and which i think have got to be constantly making abundantly clear to the media And public at large ..well beyond this tiny blog until the real story is fully exposed.
1. Everyone knows RFC EVADED ..(.NOT AVOIDED….big big difference ) tax ..BREAKING the law..I couldn’t care less how the UTT ends up…I know and we all know what they did and so do they!..so they had access to cash spent on players while the rest of us and our wee clubs paid our PAYE and NHI contributions..tens of millions not paid
2 In so cheating the rest of Scottish football they then garnered tens upon tens of millions of pounds of prize money over many years ..depriving other Scottish clubs access to those funds as well as league trophies and cups ..including various wee clubs ….all of that was then recycled and spent on players etc
3 If that wasn’t enough they then borrow (we will never know the number syphoned out of MIM into Rangers but it is recognised to be ) well over one hundred million from banks which after debt to equity conversions by LLOyds in MIM and subsequent equity write offs mean that the general public .ie .you me everyone also big time paid for Rangers wages and titles etc ….We paid for it ..not Murray ..not Rangers…US
4 they then don’t pay their trade creditors and normal BAU PAYE / NHI under Mr Whyte and the agreed wee tax bills etc ..again tens of millions
The only private investment monies I am aware of that were made and have been also written off is the ENIC / King money ( assuming King didn’t actually get it back from MIM)..say another £50m
So when the argument goes about same club .it can’t be same club tell that to the creditors …which is a very fair point …BUT ..it isnt ‘just some trade creditors ‘ being stiffed which is bad enough..This is hundreds of millions of pounds of debt left trailing in their wake ..probably all wasted completely spent chasing the European dream ..paid largely by the rest of us
So …..Leaving aside the more recent and probable illegal recycling of the recent IPO monies back to ticketus and the various international financial gangsters …This club which has spent and lost literally hundreds of millions of public funds ,other clubs prize money and wee company creditors money..wants to airbrush this all away ..and pretend to stay in business as the same entity….AND while they are at it refuse to make their assets in any way available to those creditors and (via HMRC ) we the public
The Scottish establishment particularly the SFA is not only allowing this to happen ..they appear to be cheering them on
This is absolutely disgusting ..and as some on this blog have said repeatedly ..scale wise ..it is the biggest sporting scandal ever anywhere and it is effectively being covered up ..and this cover up is being perpetuated and validated very strongly by this same club myth
I’ve said it before on here as nauseam BDO have got to lay this all bare in all this detail..and get the physical assets back ..or they too will be part of the cover up..
How anyone particularly the current president of the SFA ,having been very complicit in a lot of this ,can remain in office never mind criticise one of the victims for opening their mouth on this however obliquely…is beyond parody.
Whilst any of the complete nonsense of the myth is being perpetrated and accepted as fact .(ie .there was no cheating, debt was under control,Craig whytes was the only problem ..switch to SEVCO Scotland was OK ,.definitely same club ..blah blah blah)..any of it at all …then it has to be counter challenged with force with all these facts and numbers . ( btw I am not saying I am completely accurate here .feel free to .shoot me down on the absolute actuals )
So That is why this ocnc debate is actually key ….Don’t concede any of the fundamental points ..until this complete scandal in totality is exposed from top to bottom …particularly the SFA’s complicity in it which is what we care about ..Scottish football can not rest or go forward in peace with what we all want ie a fair level playing field for all
If it is another Hillsborough and takes 20 years so be it !
===============================================================================
Tailothe bank….may I say that through all the stuff/omnishambles surrounding this corporate and sporting scandal, I have searched for a succinct summary of the main points to be brought to public attention, in words of one syllable which we can all understand, myself included.
I think I have found it…many thanks.
Angus1983 says: (1247)
November 23, 2013 at 7:25 pm
===============================
Angus, having been at Celtic Park today one of the most intriguing stats was the approx 2,500 Aberdeen fans at the game – great to see and really added to the atmosphere.
Armageddon my erchie!
I did not manage to hear all of off the ball today but was disappointed with the part I did hear. The same old nonsense from Gordon Smith regarding the old club new club farce. According to Smith companies can be held to account but never clubs!,,,,,from this logic, and the convenient and fungible definition of club can never do wrong. Is it just me or does this fly in the face of corporate legal regulations? ..in place to protect customers, vendors, shareholders. competitors, taxpayers, and any other societal stakeholders. If we allow a system of corporate governance that allowed cubs or companies to toss the authorities a scapegoat following wrong doing, we would enter a period of business practice that would make the mafia look like the Salvation Army. Rangers died and for everyone’s good they should be given a public burial, and let the rest of us rebuild the game for the future. Sevco matter not….they will collapse soon enough under the weight of their own malpractice.
Why does Gordon Smith get frequent gigs on msm? He walked away from CW’s reign – no questions- he was a football agent and he worked for SFA, why has he no insightful comment into the sevco debacle?
Maybe Ibrox is a tardis.
The club just regenerates now and again.
Serious question – if you are a business owner and are approached by a football club to do business with them, how much likely are you to proceed given the fact that according to the authority governing them, they can walk away easily without any concern?
Can the SFA not see the damage they are doing not only to the football community but also to the business community that is engaged in business with them. Many of these businessmen have not got any interest in football never mind particular teams – so why would anyone for example, be eager to put in any bids to do the construction work at Celtic that is being currently proposed for the new ticket offices/museum etc. Unless its cash up front or I can get some water tight security, why do the work only to find out at the end that the entity I am dealing with can change and to use Neil Doncaster’s words, “shed debt” in this manner?
What message are they giving to the Scottish business community? Thanks for your money and interest, but no guarantee we can fulfill our side of the bargain/contract?
No wonder we have no one willing to sponsor or invest in anything the SFA/SPFL is involved in – because they are saying its ok to shaft business partners!
Danish Pastry says: (1718)
November 22, 2013 at 8:12 pm
“Imran Ahmed was involved there a few years ago. Small world.
http://companycheck.co.uk/company/02693942/BEAUFORT-SECURITIES-LIMITED/directors-shareholders#people-summary”
—————————–
I’m a bit behind and suspect others will have noted the presence of messrs Hoodless and Brennan in the list of past/current directors.
Greenock Jack says @ 8:11PM
================================
One of my favourites:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m07ISfx_5b0
john clarke says: (1388)
November 23, 2013 at 7:13 pm
=====================================
Well said John!
Why has Ogilvie presided over Scottish Football the last few years? Given his history, he should have at least resigned by now.
I don’t understand why he he still in the position?
Do the SFA ever do a “Fit and Proper Person” investigation into their own staff?
Another question! Who decides the position of President of The SFA?
Why has Ogilvie been allowed to wear an SFA Blazer, and all the perks that go along with that position?
Ogilvie IS a disgrace.
Rangers Supporters are being fed on the S$%t that it was all the fault of Whyte, Green, etc.
Naw!!!
Ogilvie & SDM started it all!
Murray seems to have disappeared under the radar! However, Ogilvie seems to be still making a good living as President of The SFA! Brass Neck or what?
Your collar’s been felt, time to go Campbell?
Just to amend above:
“Your collar’s been felt, time to go Campbell?”
Please amend to:
“Ogilvie, You’re Sacked!”
Another question! Who decides the position of President of The SFA?
Why has Ogilvie been allowed to wear an SFA Blazer, and all the perks that go along with that position?
——————————————————-
Do they not self appoint the president?
Maybe he has to stay as there is no ex Rangers directors to take over.
So deflectors are at full strength regarding the Ibrox boardroom.
What I can’t quite work out is with the exception of bleeding money out of the club in ever decreasing amounts, what is actually in this for the major investors?
I mean the money they are making if they were not the 1p initial investors will take years to get back not to mention making any profit.
Only fools invest in football clubs because let’s face it there is only about two clubs that make a profit!
There is certainly no money to be made in a Scottish football club.
There is even less money to be made in a club running at a minimum of a £12M pound loss per annum. This means that shortly to protect your investment you will have to start pumping in more readies to keep the money muncher alive in the vain attempt that one day it will turn a profit. However if you were that good a business man you would look at the recent financial history of this club and it predecessor. It has never turned a profit that was not funded by other people’s money whether it was the Bank Of Scotland, the tax payer, or Ticketus. Oh and that is when it was playing in Europe and making as much money as it possibly could. More recently it has been city institutions that have funded the money muncher. There is always the tantalising prospect of exiting Scottish football for England or a European League where there would no doubt be riches galore but as Celtic keep getting told that is a no hoper.
So by the time this club reaches the top league it will be at least £15M in debt although they currently have no credit line so who exactly is going to fund this level of losses and what are they going to get back from their investment? Remember these guys are businessmen and do not have a love for the club so what is in it for them?
To me this is the great conundrum. Is it the prospect of offloading the loss making football club after it has been separated from the properties allowing them to charge a continual rent?
The above may not be the case but I cannot see how this club continues to fund itself while providing a return for the major investors.
Fans are notoriously fickle but in becoming a plc they had better realise that major investors want something in return if they do not have an affinity or attachment to the club. The people who have invested in RIFC have neither an affinity nor attachment so they want a return and they won’t take it in IOU’s a la Craig Whyte.
So separation of assets makes the only sense in this scenario but that actually leaves the club in a much worse place. Not only will the new owners have to fund the money muncher they will also have to find rent as well.
Time will tell if there is another way to square this circle. Perhaps the investors will provide interest free loans for ‘The Rangers’ but I would find that notion unpalatable for them. There may be another share issue where the fans will out do themselves and cough up another £5M but I cannot see city investors putting in any more cash as this is simply a bad business operating in a poor market with a shocking business model.
And remember the bottom line here and this is the final killer. Your customer base demands money to be spent in large amounts whether you, as a business, can afford it or not and if they do not get it they are not long in letting you know they are not happy.
So there isn’t even any thanks in this business either.
How does this end?
Badly!!!
Smugas says: (549)
November 22, 2013 at 11:57 am
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Are you forgetting the News Intl. connection… In wi’ the bricks. :slamb:
valentinesclown says: (279)
November 24, 2013 at 12:05 am
Oh for heavens sake!
The President of SFA is elected by all the member clubs of the SFA.
Just a few short months ago, the Scottish clubs voted unanimously to re-elect Mr Ogilvy. That’s every single football club in Scotland, big and small, rich and poor, every last one of them, without exception, decided that Campbell was the man.
Why is Mr Ogilvy still at the SFA? Ask YOUR club.
Danish Pastry says: (1718)
November 23, 2013 at 10:20 pm
A lot of people use ‘Rangers’ when referring to ‘The Rangers’ (Sevco). I think most people are clued up as to the difference.
Personally, I don’t have a problem with a new club continuing the heritage of the previous club, but claiming to be the same one, now debt free, is shameful. I honestly don’t know why fans would want to do that. It’s embarrassing.
There’s not a lot anyone can do if the legal eagles from BDO let them phoenix in this way, but the continued insistence on being same debt-dodging club with what look like compromised titles will leave them disrespected by a whole generation of neutral fans. To them ‘The Rangers’ will just be plain old Sevco.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Danish,
I use “Rangers” because that is the name of the football club. Don’t take my word for it, have a check of the latest published “Club Directory”: http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/SFAPublications/ScottishFAPublications2013-14/Club%20Directory.pdf
As for the history thing, Rangers have been national Champions more times than any other club side in the history of association football. If you knew the feeling you’d realise that’s not something you’d let go of lightly. Personally I have not a shadow of doubt we are the same football club, albeit under the ownership of an entirely new company, so the retention of our history is not a conscious choice but a “no-brainer” so to speak.
In a parallel universe I might now have to say “I know officially we’re called “AFC Govan Rangers” now, and the official websites show us as having been formed 2012, and we’re not allowed to advertise with any reference to anything pre-2012, and that Supreme Court Judge said we are a brand new football club, but…..”
Thankfully though, the governing bodies came through for us and – I believe – we’re now serving a just penalty, far harsher than the several equivalent cases that have been seen in England, and when we return to the top-flight I will be content that we have served our time – 3 years in the wilderness – and hopefully – though the road is proving far harder than anticipated off-the-field – be returning a more responsibily run, spiv-cleansed football club.
scapaflow says: (1152)
November 24, 2013 at 12:22 am
valentinesclown says: (279)
November 24, 2013 at 12:05 am
Oh for heavens sake!
The President of SFA is elected by all the member clubs of the SFA.
Just a few short months ago, the Scottish clubs voted unanimously to re-elect Mr Ogilvy. That’s every single football club in Scotland, big and small, rich and poor, every last one of them, without exception, decided that Campbell was the man.
Why is Mr Ogilvy still at the SFA? Ask YOUR club.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
The truth Scapa is that just like the OCNC debate, our clubs don’t share our concerns about Ogilvie’s status, or if they do, they don’t care enough to do anything about it.
I am constantly dismayed that despite the consensus here on most matters regarding the governance of the former sport known as football, that people will insist on either ignoring or making excuses for their own clubs’ part in this.
We have been expressing our outrage for more than two years as facts (not speculation but actual facts) have emerged over serious corporate malfeasance, cheating, and theft from public coffers. Our clubs, let’s not use the convenient euphemism “SFA” here, OUR CLUBS have done nothing at all (save for running around in July 2012 in a blind panic and pointing fingers at each other when it became obvious that fans were failing to renew season books) to even give an appearance of a passing attachment to sporting integrity.
Not one club or any of their spokesmen has denounced the cheating, the non-payment of tax, the failure to register players properly and transparently, or the financial doping (all established FACTS). Not one has broken silence on the opacity of the background shenanigans that saw SFL clubs threated with financial penalty if SEVCO were not admitted to D1. Not one finger has been lifted to effect a solution on the “heavily conflicted” status (as affirmed by the SFA CEO) of Campbell Ogilvie.
Thirty months on in this affair and absolutely nothing has been done to redress the balance. The entire Scottish game has been engaged, not as one would expect in a soul searching, self enquiry to rid the game of the kind of corruption which has brought it into terminal disrepute, but in a panic ridden desperation to preserve the history of just one club.
Every single club is giving TRFC a pass.
On SFL/SFA membership, no dissent on fast-streaming SEVCO into the league before more legitimately qualified clubs.
On OCNC status, NOT A CHEEP from any of them – just a craven silence whilst looking the other way.
On football debts, no claims for loss of revenue or prize money.
On Campell Ogilvie, vote, vote vote ……..
On the Five Way Agreement, no-one has admitted to seeing it or agreeing it (it’s a secret don’t you know old chap)
On licence issue, NOTHING from anyone until a group of supporters make a stir and a hitherto secret correspondence is uncovered (another secret)
The clubs are taking the fans for mugs – pure and simple. They ignore requests for some serious input into the debate. No one knows anything except that they wish whiners like us would go away and let them fiddle the game in peace in the parallel universe they inhabit in common with the guy in the post right above this one.
They can stick it as far up their jacksies as possible for all I care. They can kid as many hundreds of thousands of people as they can get away with. I’m damned if they will be kidding me.
Do they not self appoint the president?
Maybe he has to stay as there is no ex Rangers directors to take over.
—————————————–
I was joking.
Only about the first part
bryce9a says: (7)
November 24, 2013 at 12:32 am
1
9
Rate This
Danish Pastry says: (1718)
November 23, 2013 at 10:20 pm
__________________________________
Bryce,
Welcome.
Please don’t be put off by the thumbs down.
I hear what you say about the same club.
I’d like to hear your thoughts on the post below:
Tailothebank says: (51)
November 23, 2013 at 8:21 pm
95
0
Rate This
As a non OF fan with no axe to grind with decent RFC fans, TOB post resonates. Whereas when I hear ‘rangers’ the words ‘having cake and eating it’ spring to mind, as does ‘cheats’, ‘thieves’, ‘complicity’,’defiance’ and ‘complacency of fans’.
The shock for us as fans of non Glasgow clubs is in finding out how well placed this complacency was! Given the extent to which the mountain was moved to accommodate Mohammed in this case! From the RFC fans POV I should imagine things are different, since the mountain still blew up in the end and left a smouldering crater. Nevertheless a degree of corruption has been exposed which is in neither of our interests. I hope you will engage constructively – like Ryan for example- with fans of other clubs as we try and fix this mess in everyone’s interests.
A recognition of the past – good and bad.
A better future for all.
Your old club has alot of unfinished business. If you want the titles, assume the debt – financial and moral.
Or start anew. Unencumbered. With hereitage. But without history. Its up to you.
But you cannot have it both ways.