Celtic Shareholders who put forward a resolution to the Celtic AGM in 2013 are preparing for the 2019 AGM tomorrow and some of their conclusions are reproduced below. Celtic are planning to vote the current resolution of 2019 down after several years of kicking the can down the road after an agreement to adjourn the 2013 motion was agreed at that AGM.
Given the weight of evidence, and the prevarication that has gone on for this extended period of time, you don’t have to be a student of politics to infer that Celtic are failing their own shareholders over this.
There appears to have been, at best, a failure of SFA governance over this issue. At worst? Well that doesn’t really bear thinking about. That Celtic (and other clubs too) have been in possession of the evidence outlined below but have failed to act on it is a damning indictment of the quality of people running our clubs. Peter Lawwell’s words from 2008 about the integrity of competition seem hollow coming from the same lips as the man who has failed to pursue any kind of sporting integrity over upholding the rules of the game.
Of course we are talking about a fundamental difference in how people see the game. There are those of us who (some say naively) consider that upholding the aspects of fair play and competition are paramount, and those who see the commercial aspects of the game as the foremost consideration. A pragmatist might find a way to accommodate both, but there are apparently no pragmatists in boardrooms all over Scotland – just financial accountants.
It would be unfair to categorise the latter constituency as suffering from some kind of character defect of course. Doesn’t make you a bad person because short term financial gain is your thing.
But it puts you at odds with the paying punters – or at least some of them. As a Celtic fan myself, I’m not so sure that I can take any real joy from my own club’s success if I have come to the conclusion that they themselves are happy with a rigged competition. I am not so sure I can credibly throw stones at anyone who is caught cheating when I see that serious evidence of malpractice is being ignored and hidden under the rug by my own club.
I am sure there are those who feel the same as I do. Are there enough of us? Probably not, but the effect of it all from a personal perspective, is that it disconnects me from the process where common goals and objectives are shared between fans, players and clubs. That’s what clubs are for after all isn’t it?
In short, if the game is rigged, there is no common objective.
And consequently, many of us, deprived of that shared mission, that bond broken, will be forced to re-evaluate their relationship with their clubs.
We all have our own thoughts, but the urge to walk away forever is strong with me.
The Resolution 12 Story
In 2012, Celtic shareholders brought a resolution before the Celtic PLC AGM which asked the Celtic Board to refer certain matters to UEFA because they felt that the Scottish Football Association was compromised, no longer fit for purpose in relation to these matters, at least, and had failed Celtic and all the other football clubs in Scotland and in its duty as a Governing body, and it has separately failed UEFA as the Licensing Authority appointed by UEFA to grant licences to play in European Football in relation to Scottish teams.
The actual wording used was as follows;
“This AGM requests the Board exercise the provision contained in the Procedural Rules Governing the UEFA Club Financial Control Body Article 10 with jurisdiction and investigation responsibilities identified in articles 3 & 11 (Note 1), by referring/bringing to the attention of the UEFA Club Financial Control Body (CFCB), the licensing administration practices of the Scottish Football Association (SFA), requesting the CFCB undertake a review and investigate the SFA’s implementation of UEFA & SFA license compliance requirements, with regard to qualification, administration and granting of licenses to compete in football competitions under both SFA and UEFA jurisdiction, since the implementation of the Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations of 2010.”
The response of the Celtic Board was to argue that this resolution was NOT NECESSARY because the board itself had already recognised that there had been failings within the SFA Licensing process, and they were already in correspondence with the SFA in relation to much the same issue.
The difference between the board and the Resolutioners was that the board wanted to continue corresponding with the SFA rather than refer the matter to UEFA or anyone else, whereas the Resolutioners argued that the SFA were hopelessly compromised, were unfit for purpose, could not of themselves remedy the situation they had created, and so wanted to refer the matter to UEFA as an independent and overseeing body whose rules had been flaunted, broken, ignored and to be frank, completely manipulated as a result of SFA inaction and inactivity.
After much discussion between the board and the Resolutioners, it was reluctantly agreed that the resolution should be adjourned and to allow the SFA to be given the opportunity to demonstrate that they could operate as a proper Governing body should and to answer all and any questions put to them via the Celtic PLC board and , where appropriate, the Resolutioners and ,if necessary, their solicitors.
In the interim period, it has become clear to the Resolutioners that the SFA are not fit for purpose, just as they originally argued, and that they are not, and never could have been, the appropriate body to consider and determine the failings in the licensing system that the Resolutioners had complained of.
This is not merely opinion on the part of the Resolutioners but is the determination and judgement of a formally constituted judicial panel appointed by the SFA itself.
The Resolutioners complain that the SFA have failed, and continue to fail in the following areas;
- They failed to oversee a fair and robust European Licence application process before and after March 2011 in respect of the appropriate season.
They had failed to mount any sort of investigation despite being contacted by HMRC from 2006 onwards in relation to the unlawful activities of a member club – they should have had a watching brief and requested regular updates from HMRC directly but didn’t. - They failed to properly apply the necessary tests demanded by UEFA in considering licence applications, and subsequently, through their then CEO, sought to justify their licensing process and the grant of certain licences on a number of different contradictory grounds – none of which stood scrutiny.
- They failed to monitor, update their records or make specific enquiries between 30th March 2011 and Mid May 2011 when the list of application grants was formally intimated to UEFA – and by which time there was widespread public rumour and speculation about the state of the tax affairs of a member club together with specific legal documents which outlined that there was indeed a tax bills due which would have disqualified that club from being granted a UEFA licence – had the rules been applied properly.
- They failed to grasp the situation between March 2011 and August 2011 when the Sheriff Officers were seen arriving at the same club and had still made no enquiry.
- They failed to carry out any monitoring duties at all post the grant of the licence, with then CEO Reagan telling Celtic that once a European licence was granted – which it was in April 2011 – all further compliance monitoring and any necessary action was the province of UEFA. This was later contradicted by UEFA themselves.
- They failed to monitor through the June 30th and September 30th, two key datelines specified with the UEFA regulations, and there exists a damning e-mail from one SFA officer to the offending club which effectively says that he hopes UEFA will be too busy to notice the deficiencies in the latest submissions sent by the SFA to UEFA in respect of the club concerned.
Throughout, the SFA denied that there were any failures in their procedures, that licences had been correctly granted, there had been no breaches of the rules and maintained that their procedures had been audited and approved by UEFA during the period.
According to the official UEFA website, no such Audit actually took place with the same website confirming which Football Associations were in fact audited at the relevant time. There is no mention of any SFA Audit.
The SFA claimed that not only was there nothing wrong with the grant of the licence, but that there was nothing for them to report during the post grant period as it was not their responsibility – and then added that even if something had been wrong, or was later found to be wrong with the grant, they could not report the matter to UEFA and could take no action because they were time barred from doing so.
Post the Craig Whyte Trial, where long held evidence was publicly noted and commented upon, Celtic and the SPFL publicly called for there to be a full independent Legal inquiry into all that had transpired during “the EBT years” and all aspects of how what had occurred, impacted on football Governance in Scotland.
The SFA rejected those calls and instead insisted on their own internal inquiry into the UEFA licence process for 2011/2012 – despite previously insisting that there had never been anything to investigate or report to UEFA who had entrusted them with the administration of their Licensing process.
The SFA wrote to every club in Scotland to say they were undertaking that investigation and later publicly announced that as a result of that investigation they had uncovered sufficient evidence to justify bringing formal charges alleging breaches of both SFA and UEFA rules.
This despite denying for a number of years that there had been any need for an investigation and despite reassuring Celtic that their licensing process was robust, had been conducted properly, and had not resulted in any incorrect grant of a licence.
The SFA appointed a judicial panel to hear those charges, determine whether they had been proven or not and then to hand out an appropriate punishment.
That Judicial panel have ruled that legally they (the SFA appointed panel) and the SFA itself cannot bring, hear, determine and act on those charges, nor consider the activities of the football club concerned in any judicial forum, because apparently the SFA had previously decided and formally entered into a contract which says that the SFA will not, and cannot, administer their normal Governmental and Judicial function (which would normally apply to any other club in Scotland and at any other time in the history of the SFA or UEFA) in relation to the acts concerned and the specific football club in question.
Instead, the Panel ruled that the charges concerned should be considered by the Court of Arbitration for Sport as a matter of contract and law – and could not be considered by an SFA appointed panel.
In other words, it has been judicially determined that the SFA cannot as a matter of law enforce its own rules or those of UEFA in relation to one club, and have signed away their entire right to oversee proper football Governance and the implementation of SFA and UEFA rules in this instance.
Further, that contract must have been known to all the appropriate SFA officers who decided and took part in the inquiry that led to the SFA bringing the disciplinary charges – Stuart Reagan, Andrew MacKinlay and Tony McGlennan – and when the SFA rejected Celtic’s call for a fully independent inquiry.
In effect, those same officers mounted their own internal inquiry and brought proceedings which they knew, or ought reasonably to have known, which would end in a legal dead end.
Such a course of action amounts to professional incompetence on a monumental scale – at best!
Further, subsequent SFA officials, assured the officers of Celtic Football Club that following the decision of the Independent Judicial Panel there was no reason why the SFA would not take the matter to CAS and in turn used the officials of Celtic Football Club to relay that message to the Resolutioners in the knowledge, and with the intention, that Celtic PLC shareholders would rely on those assurances and would act accordingly. Those actions and those assurances should now be the subject of a wholly separate inquiry.
Since those assurances were made to Celtic officials, Solicitors acting on behalf of shareholders have written to the SFA on no less than three occasions requesting clarification on what the SFA is doing, whether or not the decision from the independent tribunal advising that the matter should go to CAS will be implemented, and requesting a proposed timetable when this will happen. All such letters have been ignored or avoided by the SFA.
Subsequently, the current CEO of the SFA has stated that whether or not the matter should go to CAS will only be determined prior to Christmas 2019 – some 18 months after the ruling by the independent judicial panel.
This position is a complete volte face from what the SFA told Celtic officials immediately after the 2018 panel hearing.
The conclusion to all of this can only be that the SFA is not fit for purpose and that the governance of Scottish football is so bad, so broken and so far removed from normal judicial and corporate business practice that it must be looked at by an independent body if the matter is not referred to CAS.
Further, all of this must be made public, must be out in the open and must be properly disclosed otherwise any future investment in any club whether by private individuals, stock market listed entities, banks, loan houses, credit houses or whatever is predicated on the wholly fraudulent notion that the SFA will consistently apply its own rules or those of UEFA.
Celtic, as a respected member of UEFA, should not and cannot, stand back and allow this shambolic governance to continue unchecked and without external examination as to do so would be doing a total disservice to UEFA, and such a course of action would potentially make Celtic a party to the entire shambolic administration we have seen thus far.
The resolutioners have stated consistently since 2012 that SFA governance is not fit for purpose and have requested that this entire matter should be referred to UEFA as the overall governing body for European football and as a footballing authority who has entrusted the SFA to oversee the fair application of its rules in Scotland.
Despite what is now accepted as continued and regular SFA failure, that request has met with obfuscation and resistance.
However persistence beats resistance and no matter what the outcome of the 2019 Celtic AGM this is an issue which will not go away and is worthy of consideration and determination in a more formal legal forum.
In yesterdays Huddersfield v Stoke game yesterday some of the Huddersfield fans decided to focus on Norn Irishman James McClean's decision a few years back to not wear a poppy around armistice time because of the Bloody Sunday behaviour of the paras.
Here is a brief report
Huddersfield Town manager Danny Cowley expects his club to make sure anyone guilty of sectarian abuse against James McClean receives a due punishment.
McClean reported abuse to referee James Linington during Stoke City's win over Huddersfield Town at the John Smith's Stadium.
There had been chants about the IRA when the winger took a Corner and the referee went over to speak to both Cowley and Stoke boss Michael O'Neill before an announcement was made over the public address system.
I'm sure there will be more online if you are interested but for me the interesting thing is after an announcement and I think a threat of taking the players off the pitch that the chants stopped and the match was concluded.
Allyjambo @ 11.59 2 Jan
re : King
There is no doubt amongst the Ibrox support he (King) is perceived as a hero who saved their club & no criticism will be tolerated of "their saviour" with talk of statues being erected in recognition for all he has done . I was thinking while they are at it , why not have a statue of David Longmuir & Jim Ballantyne (ex the old SFL) whose proposal (& adopted) to/by the SFA "assigned" previous titles & Cups won by Rangers FC to The Rangers FC thus ensuring we have to suffer in perpetuity calls of "the world's most successful club" , "going for 55 " etc thanks to the dynamic duo (whatever happened to them ?) .
Their efforts surely must be recognised formally for all they have done for the Ibrox phoenix & the continuation lie .
Alastair Johnston won't let the old club/new club argument lie.
https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/rangers/i-always-wondered-about-the-mentality-of-celtic-fans-who-said-rangers-died-former-ibrox-chairman-blasts-hoops-supporters-over-new-club-claims-1-5069422
eJ, you're very naughty for stirring up OC/NC again!
I had always thought that Alastair Johnston was one of the 'more reasonable' Blue Room occupants…
But, his quotes are obviously directed to the 'The Rangers' fans.
Is he just virtue signalling his 'Rainjursness' to the hordes… perhaps positioning himself to succeed King as Chairman?
easyJambo 2nd January 2020 at 14:29
Best piece of reasoning yet from an Old Clubber. They are the same club because…just because!
And WTF (excuse my language) is this all about, and the rest of the mince that followed?
"You know what? If that was the end of Rangers and Celtic and if that was the end of the big game that started in 1888 (the first Old Firm meeting) all the way to 2012 – we won that game."
Maybe it's just me, but I can't make head nor tail of anything he's quoted as saying here. It seems to me like the ramblings of a lunatic. I hope, for his sake, he's not as ill as those ramblings make him appear and that the interview took place while he was in his cups!
PS Have we just discovered the true identity of multiple posters on here?
'Cluster One 2nd January 2020 at 11:24
The SFA now don’t have to find King fit and proper now…'
########################
The SFA issued a statement on 19.05.15 stating (last paragraph thereof) that DCK was F&P:
https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/news/scottish-fa-statement-mr-dave-king/
'The Scottish FA can confirm it has now received this supplementary documentation in full and the Board is satisfied Mr King is Fit and Proper in terms of Article 10.2.'
I'm not aware of that 'satisfaction' being withdrawn subsequently.
I know that Mike Ashley (as MASH) requested a Judicial Review of the SFA's actions regarding DCK's F&P as a director of RIFC, but dropped the case in April 2016.
https://www.scottishlegal.com/article/mike-ashleys-company-to-pay-sfa-and-dave-kings-expenses-following-abandoned-legal-action-over-fit-and-proper-ruling
I don't know what updated information re DCK the SFA gave to MASH at the last moment to cause the abandonment of proceedings (contemporaneous MSM reports used words like 'assurance re the financial position of King'), but it seems likelier (to me, at least) that the SFA intimated that DCK was not a director of the member club, TRFC, and was unlikely to become one, thus making his F&P status moot. Again, I don't know if DCK required to give the SFA assurances that he wouldn't become a director, act as a shadow director or indeed would recuse himself when football matters were being discussed at RIFC board level.
We do know how DCK has conducted himself since 2016, however…
easyJambo 2nd January 2020 at 14:29
Alastair Johnston won't let the old club/new club argument lie.
====================
Johnston is protected in Scotland because as someone associated with Rangers he is regarded by the majority of the media as a better, more honest, and superior person to others, and in particular a better, more honest, and superior person to anyone associated with Celtic.
If one thing has become clear to me over the past few days it is the vice like grip Rangers still have on controlling the media narrative. Celtic will never win the PR battle and they will never win in the court of public opinion. They shouldn't bother even trying, as any time they have in the past the media turn on them like a pack of rabid dogs.
We may have diversity and inclusion law, and it may not be tolerated anymore to talk about 'the token Tim' in the workplace, but the Scottish Football Media are absolutely decades behind on that score in my view.
I think Skeletor has just admitted that the construct IS a new club . "We were ahead in the head-to-head count when we died , so it's going to take 120 years to reach those totals and for you to have a chance to be ahead ."
So Alastair Johnston "always wondered about the mentality of certain Celtic supporters…who basically said our club died in February 2012."?
"Always"? That's a long time to be wondering about anything especially when the subject of the wonderment is a short, sharp point.
Mr Johnston: Wonder no more.
The mentality is fine.
The mentality is healthy.
The mentality is founded in fact.
The mentality is founded in law.
The mentality is logical.
The mentality is rational.
The mentality is inescapable.
The mentality is not going to change.
To his credit Mr Johnston referred to "…certain Celtic supporters…".
He's right. I've seldom been more certain about anything than I am that Rangers died.
I know no-one's interested but I always wondered about the mentality of certain Rangers' Directors who basically said EBTs, financial fraud, regulatory maladministration and lying to HMRC (and everyone else) were acceptable and in no way blameworthy.
Aw man how much Jelly and Ice Cream can one stomach.Honestly the fans out of Ibrox must be sick fed up of this and must think just shut the F up, maybe no.
https://www.facebook.com/bbcscotlandnews/videos/craig-whytes-rangers-villainy-remains/1592987530725459/
How can you charge a guy with murder if the body is still alive Alastair?
DAVE King has revealed his desire to restore Rangers to pre-insolvency status by taking the old company out of its current liquidation process and placing it back in the ownership of Ibrox Stadium and other assets.
How do you do that Davie one has a murder scene and the other wants to reserect the corpse, too much Lazarius juice been supped out the loving cup at the bells i think.
easyJambo 2nd January 2020 at 14:29
'..former Ibrox chairman Alastair Johnston..'
++++++++++++
There was a Charlotte Fakes tape of a man named Johnson being humiliated when in a drunken state by a man name Imran Ahmed, unless I am mistaken. The drunk man sounded not so much drunk as mentally unwell and troubled.
I don't suppose, despite the similarities in the type of irrational, whingeing , contradictory verbiage that is attributed to the former Ibrox Chairman,it could possibly have been the same Johnson to whom oor Imran was speaking on that tape?
Something has clearly got the people connected with the dead club as well as the new club very ,very keen to deflect from other items of news that might be on the stocks.
Wonder what it could be?
Maybe if it is the same Johnson fella and he gets a few more New Year's bevvies, he might let something slip, blithering old duffer that he seems to me to be.
John Clark 2nd January 2020 at 18:48
There was a Charlotte Fakes tape of a man named Johnson being humiliated when in a drunken state by a man name Imran Ahmed, unless I am mistaken. The drunk man sounded not so much drunk as mentally unwell and troubled.
===========================
John, the man in question was called Malcolm Murray.
upthehoops 2nd January 2020 at 19:12
'..John, the man in question was called Malcolm Murray. '
+++++++++++
Ha,ha.! Pity about that, uth, but still, they're all 'Rangers' men together, virtually indistinguishable in attitudes to truth.
Jingso.Jimsie 2nd January 2020 at 15:28
Again, I don’t know if DCK required to give the SFA assurances that he wouldn’t become a director, act as a shadow director or indeed would recuse himself when football matters were being discussed at RIFC board level.
…………
Yes he did give the SFA assurances that he would not act as a shadow director.and we know.
…………….
but it seems likelier (to me, at least) that the SFA intimated that DCK was not a director of the member club, TRFC, and was unlikely to become one,
I don’t know what updated information re DCK the SFA gave to MASH at the last moment to cause the abandonment of proceedings
…………….
We know as our very own JC was there to give us a report.
Ps. i have links for both if needed.
Myself and some others here on SFM have glossed over the OC/NC debate this last week or so and asked “Why now”
Why has it raised it’s head, and why are the Alastair Johnston’s of this world putting there bit in?
Well it certainly looks like they are painting the tape for inescapable events in the not too distant future . Playing the race card will put the blame for the departure of Morelos firmly on Celtic fans shoulders , hounded out , life made impossible , unfairly targeted will all be phrases heard sooner than later , that's if anyone actually wants to buy him . If he does go then explaining why they only got a fraction of what they have reputedly turned down in the past will be a harder tale to spin . Will the phrase undisclosed fee rumoured to be in the region of xxxxxx be enough? As for Mr Surrender No's ramblings I can only assume the possibility of another administration event is looming large . King won't be stepping up to the plate (imo) and others must be questioning the logic of throwing in substantial amounts in the slim hope of a CL group stage place. They will have to account for balancing the books in order to qualify via FFP rules and due to previous years largess' this means no losses for this season ending . Much will depend on the court outcome of January 17th and of course how much they can rake in during the transfer window . Selling your best assets in January may just affect the destination of the title by May and that CL prize money . Sometimes you just can't have your cake and eat it.
John Clark 2nd January 2020 at 18:48
Is it possible you're thinking of the video footage of then Chairman (and immediately ex-Chairman) Malcolm Murray?
LUGOSI 2nd January 2020 at 21:46
'..Is it possible you're thinking of the video footage of then Chairman .'
+++++++++++++
Entirely possible! I certainly thought I had seen a clearly intoxicated person being made fun of by 'colleagues', but I do also remember a longish one to one phone call between Ahmed and a near maudlin-in-drink person.
Perhaps I am conflating two separate incidents, neither of them t my mind showing the folk concerned as being anything like decent people, never mind 'colleagues' thirled together by untruths.
Any update on "Groingate" ? Seems to have been a three minute wonder .
RFC (IL). cheated and SC verdict proved that. To this day no punishment and no smsm reporting on this verdict. They died and for 1 day smsm reported the truth. Every day since then smsm do not mention the L word, as if it did not happen. It did occur and we all know it no matter what stance the media or SFA take. They deserve to be liquidated and this new version are cheating as they are each year a growing concern and require millions to see out each season. Again no smsm reporting and they know like we do the dire financial predicament this new club is in. Roll on January 17th to hopefully an end to the merchandise saga with Mr Ashley. If Morelos is sold in this window I will be glad as I have never seen a more despicable cheating footballer for as long as I can remember. A really shameful new club.
Mibbes the beginning of the endgame , with the angst emanating from down Ibrox way ?
Surely somebody on here knows a taxi driver who heard from a client just out the pub all that happened in the tunnel.
I was thinking that Alastair Johnston's remarks about Celtic fans "mentality" and so on regarding the death of Rangers was a PR blunder in that it brought to the fore again a debate that Traynor and TRFC had been quietly burying for years, and reignited that debate in public. I put it down to him being out of touch and vain, seeking to put himself back centre stage after a big result at CP suggested the tide may be turning and that was the time to emerge from hiding and bask in the limelight.
I'm wondering now though, since his two messages were death denial and his previous role as a director, whether there might indeed be plans afoot for a third coming of some sort, pre or post a January 17th. decision in the Ashley case. I have no idea how such a trick could be worked I may say.
macfurgly 3rd January 2020 at 17:41
'…whether there might indeed be plans afoot for a third coming of some sort, pre or post a January 17th. decision in the Ashley case.'
+++++++++++++++++++
There is a well known proverb, macfurgly, about dogs returning to their vomit.
As a generalisation, and prescinding from any particular past or present situation, I suppose if wicked men of commerce see that other wicked men appear to have got away with a swindle , there might be an inclination to try to repeat the swindle where the same set of circumstances applies and opportunity arises, and assurances are given (in secret, of course) by other wicked men.
Happy New Year folks.
Why the same club myth matters not just to Celtic supporters but to supporters of all other clubs bar one who played by the rules (even the insolvency rules).
It is not what TRFC think of themselves that is important, it is what it symbolises in sporting integrity terms to those who are fair minded.
If Scottish football sees them as the same club (although UEFA do not for their licensing purposes and so to do the SFA since it is UEFA Licensing rules they are bound by) and whenever they win a title, it becomes title 55 (or whatever), it is that not since 2000 or even earlier, but lets take the year when ebt usage started, Rangers FC have ever won anything abiding by the same rules as their competitors!
They have also used unpaid debt to provide a quality of squad that was good enough to win titles in that period after Celtic decided paying debt then avoiding it was the right thing to do from 2004.
There is an SFA Rule (that is the basis of the stalled JPDT charges on the 2011 UEFA licence) that in the 2017 version states :
5. Obligations and Duties of Members
5.1 All members shall:-
(a) observe the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship in accordance with the rules of
fair play
b) be subject to and shall comply with:-
(i) these Articles;
(ii) the Judicial Panel Protocol;
(iii) the Challenge Cup Competition Rules;
(iv) the Registration Procedures;
(v) International Match Calendar;
(vi) Club Licensing Procedures; and
vii) any statutes, regulations, directives, codes, decisions promulgated by the Board, the
Professional Game Board, the Non-Professional Game Board, the Judicial Panel, a
Committee or sub-committee, FIFA, UEFA or the Court of Arbitration for Sport;
An equivalent Article in 2011 said
Article 5.1 Obligations and Duties of Members
“5.1 All members shall observe the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship in accordance with the rules of fair play”
This is such a natural requirement to make sport a sport and set integrity expectations that it would be surprising if previous SFA rules did not make a similar provision, but even if the requirement to act with integrity was only introduced in 2011 (and I'm hoping here someone will have a copy of earlier SFA articles) the unpaid debt charge still applies.
Okay? Now read this article by Brian Ponsonby of the BBC from 2012 which sets out Rangers FC’s financial history.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-14880473
Note the reference to the transfer of £50m RFC debt in 2004 to MIH after a share issue failed the necessary buy in. Now how much of MIH’s debt including that £50M was written off by Lloyds whilst also pursuing the £18M debt still on the books of RFC in 2012?
So whether the tax payer funded that write off or the bank bore the brunt it was £50m of unpaid debt.
That takes us to the ebt usage where the sum owed to HMRC and so the taxpayer even allowing for recent reduction was at least £50m and that does not include the £14M in PAYE and VAT not paid by CW or the £2.8m neither he nor his predecessor paid. Lets round that to £115m of other peoples money ostensibly stolen to provide titles and cups from 2000.
Now here is another funny thing, in 2011 there was a rush largely driven from CQN to strip titles on the basis of a breach of player registration rules. I remember myself and TBB saying that was premature as the real breach was winning titles by unlawful means (still then to be decided by Tax Tribunals) which turned out to be a breach Article 5, for how can anyone now say integrity and sportsmanship wasn’t disregarded?
The LNS Commission itself was a sham, enabled by non disclosure of the unlawful nature of the DOS ebts and the basis on which the liability for the £2.8m owed was conceded – a dishonest reply to HMRC enquiries , in particular one in 2005.
This non disclosure enabled LNS to say whilst there was no question of dishonesty individual or corporate and in doing so swerve Article 5 that would have officially recognised that all of those titles using ebts were not honestly won.
That non disclosure was notified to the SPL Board in 2014 from SFM, which included Eric Riley of Celtic, but they eventually passed that buck to the SFA ,who in 2017 then said they did not want to revisit LNS.
When Johnston says he does not understand the mentality of Celtic supporters not recognising RFC as the same club, you have to wonder at the mentality of someone (and a club) who want to hold on to those titles that were never honorably or honestly won under the sporting principles codified in Article 5 of SFA rules.
There is the real problem.
Its as if the Celtic trophy room had been burgled by RFC , Celtic were notified as such in 2014 but said ach lets just ask for a review via the SPFL without stating the significance of the non disclosure, and hope it all goes away. It will not, it will hang around like the dead fish in Gordon Dury’s car boot and stink the game until it is removed.
Until the injustice of the decade 2000 to 2011 is addressed, along with the attempts to pervert its course by selective use of the rules since 2012, possibly as a result of the 5 Way Agreement of 2012 that is protecting the SFA and RFC from investigation, the rancor of allowing RFC to keep their ill gotten gains, possibly legitimised under the 5 Way Agreement, will not go away.
If Johnson wants TRFC to be recognised as same club as RFC and keep its history, then he and his club will have to admit to dishonesty on a massive scale was part of it and surrender the dishonestly won titles , but perhaps that is not in his or their mentality.
Auldheid 3rd January 2020 at 21:10
Note the reference to the transfer of £50m RFC debt in 2004 to MIH after a share issue failed the necessary buy in. Now how much of MIH’s debt including that £50M was written off by Lloyds whilst also pursuing the £18M debt still on the books of RFC in 2012?
=========================================
MIH wrote off an investment of £59m in RFC plc when it was sold for £1.
From the MIH 2011 accounts:
macfurgly 3rd January 2020 at 17:41
'…whether there might indeed be plans afoot for a third coming of some sort, pre or post a January 17th. decision in the Ashley case.'
=========================
Don't expect anything from the hearing in the SDI case later this month. Going by the transcript of the last hearing on 2 October 2019, there were a number of dates set, none of which suggest that we will get a final decision anytime soon.
* Eight weeks for submission of an amended defence and counterclaim from Rangers and Elite (subsequently submitted on 27 November)
* A further two weeks for SDI to prepare their response to Rangers, Elite and the counterclaim(s).
* All parties to prepare a joint list of issues by 10 January 2020.
* A "directions hearing" will be held on 15 January 2020 (the Judge had initially suggested 17 January and was keen not to call a formal Case Management Conference as it would allow him to progress some maters at the hearing rather than wait for the next hearing date. A CMC will probably follow the "directions hearing", before the substantive hearing whether the current liability is sustained or any new liability arises)
Elite is new to the case, and Rangers have changed their legal team which has caused some of the delay, but it is the amended defence and the counterclaim which is the primary reason for the extended proceedings.
An indication of the way the Judge was thinking:
easyJambo 3rd January 2020 at 22:59
ooooo
Thank you. I revert to my initial thoughts.
ooooo
Auldheid 3rd January 2020 at 21:10
"If Johnson wants TRFC to be recognised as same club as RFC and keep its history, then he and his club will have to admit to dishonesty on a massive scale was part of it and surrender the dishonestly won titles , but perhaps that is not in his or their mentality".
ooooo
Clearly it is not in his or their mentality, and nor is it in their mentality to admit that the Rangers that they grew up with is being liquidated in its entirety; but the thing is they know it all to be true, and choose to live with that knowledge, and with their own insincerity and dishonesty. None of them would buy a car off himself.
John Clark 3rd January 2020 at 19:58
There is a well known proverb, macfurgly, about dogs returning to their vomit.
ooooo
The urbane Alastair Johnstone? Now there's an image to conjure with.
In my humble opinion , Alastair Johnston is basically saying " we got away with it , suck it up ", rubbng it in the faces of the "enemies" . Doesn't matter to people like him how they win things , as long as they do and can crow about it . Call it gamesmanship if you will . They do it for their fraternity , and , should they be caught , laugh and ask what you're going to do about it . Their fraternal allies will ensure that the consequences are minimal , if any , and history still records a win . Yes , they are insecure and need to be percieved as "simply the best", to the extent that somebody's taigy" name can strike fear into the should said somebody be more sucessful than their Presbyterian selves . I'm irreligious ,and support two teams that will win SFA in the grand scheme of things , Scoland and The Mighty Jags , and struggle to understand their need to be pre-eminent – most likely because we've never been there . I suspect that , in their preconscience , they live in a caste-like world where they are in the top strata forever , and will use any means to preseve that status quo , much like the situation in Norn Irn . Don't want to be equal , want to be better , because it's our tradition . Raging against he dying of the light . Sorry about the politics .
The dying of the light .
The site must be making a fortune by my inadvertant clicking on adverts !
macfurgly 4th January 2020 at 00:47 easyJambo 3rd January 2020 at 22:59 ooooo Thank you. I revert to my initial thoughts. ooooo Auldheid 3rd January 2020 at 21:10 "If Johnson wants TRFC to be recognised as same club as RFC and keep its history, then he and his club will have to admit to dishonesty on a massive scale was part of it and surrender the dishonestly won titles , but perhaps that is not in his or their mentality". ooooo Clearly it is not in his or their mentality, and nor is it in their mentality to admit that the Rangers that they grew up with is being liquidated in its entirety; but the thing is they know it all to be true, and choose to live with that knowledge, and with their own insincerity and dishonesty. None of them would buy a car off himself.
———————-
And something that proves that to be the case, and that it bothers them – a great deal, is also the reason why we don't need an answer to the question – 'Why now?' The answer is there for us all to see, for the reason they continue to argue that they are the same club is because it really does bother them! It really is important to them what we all think of them! Not only do they know within their hearts that the current Rangers is not the same as the infinitely more successful Rangers of old, they know that the current Rangers would collapse if the truth was ever universally acknowledged (assuming, of course, that financial mismanagement doesn't take care of that first)!
_______
On the narrower meaning of the question 'Why now?', as in 'why at this current time?', no answer is currently obvious, but it is rather curious (to say the least) that an old internet based proponent of the OC argument should come on here, after a very lengthy absence, pushing his self-produced theories, just a matter of days before someone steeped in all that is wrong at Ibrox has come out of the blue with a 'because we won an Old Firm Derby match' reasoning (if it could possibly be described as 'reasoning') suggesting there is something wrong with the mentality of any Celtic supporter who doesn't see things the same way as this cheating charlatan does.
While this OC narrative awakening might well be connected to some upcoming insolvency event at Ibrox, I think it's more likely to be linked to the inevitable Blue Room musical chairs that will start once King has officially left the building, with Johnston starting his PR over a New Year drink (I hope for his sake it was said after consuming more than one very large, strong alcohol based beverage). I also wonder if he (Johnston) had (indirectly) contacted various Rangers bloggers and requested/instructed them to re-open the 'debate' in time for his own pronouncement.
_______________
I wonder why Johnston, with his undoubted inside track on all things 'Rangers', didn't use Eastwood's OC argument? After all, if what Eastwood claims is, indeed, what happened to keep 'the club alive', then Johnston is bound to know this and would use it rather than come out with this nonsensical rant.
Anyone care to try and explain this? Eastwood?
paddy malarkey 4th January 2020 at 02:58
=================================
if A.J and all the other liquidation deniers really are so sure Rangers* are the same club, why do they have to protest so loudly about it?
In my view you are right about the supremacy thing though, and it is all related to the peculiarly Scottish nature of a certain fraternal organisation, which doesn't seem to be linked to similar attitudes anywhere else it exists in the world.
As always though my bugbear is the media. They have handed this guy a free unchallenged platform to spread his propaganda, and to speak of Celtic fans in a derogatory tone. As Michael Stewart said on Twitter, just imagine the sheer outrage were anyone associated with Celtic to speak of Rangers fans in this way.
I have a friend whose relative came from outside Scotland to take up a position with a very prominent media outlet. He is a Catholic, although not a Celtic fan. He is simply gobsmacked at the levels of pro-Rangers and anti-Celtic bias he has witnessed within influential people in the Scottish media, and sometimes there is a more sinister element to it. Even Graham Spiers, seemingly one of the more objective writers, speaks today in the Times of the 'tribalism' among fans regarding the racism debate around Morelos. What Spiers avoids of course is that it was Rangers themselves who kicked this off, that as yet there is no evidence to support it, that Celtic and their fans are being demonised because of it, and that the media are giving it their full support.
I am not going to be stupid enough to deny there could be racist attitudes among the Celtic support. The Mark Walters incident, albeit from a different era, remains a shameful stain on our history that can't be eradicated. However, the notion that Morelos in this present day is subjected to more racism than any other black player is preposterous, and there is zero evidence to support it. As always though a lie will go around the world six times before the truth even gets a chance.
God only knows how vicious the reaction is going to be if Rangers actually win the league.
I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments UTH, although I feel the seemingly more objective Speirs is merely deflecting, along with the triumphalists like Rae and Boyd, from the vile and abominable actions of 'Cut Throat Jake' Morelos.
Also, could you imagine the apoplectic SMSM reaction if Leigh Griffiths ( who was roundly chastised for waving a Celtic scarf at Ibrox a while back) had performed the equally abhorrent gun firing gesture from Ryan Kent?
I'm afraid we'll see more 'Fake News' and cheerleaders for TRFC wheeled out as the season progresses – aimed at undermining CFC.
Whilst it is frustrating to be faced with injustice with regard to fair coverage and reporting, I know what my team are up against here (no need to spell it out) but will continue to 'keep the faith' in the hope that justice in the form of a 9th successive title will materialise this year.
On a lighter note, I quite enjoy the ramblings of the Eastwoods and Steerpikes on this site – they are clearly deluded.
Allyjambo 4th January 2020 at 08:35
………………….
The Alistair Johnston one is a strange one.( I think it’s more likely to be linked to the inevitable Blue Room musical chairs that will start once King has officially left the building,)
If i remember correctly, did king not mention at the last AGM that RIFC would be wound down or something.(happy to be corrected, as i don’t have the time this morning to look it up)
Now we know Mr Johnstone is a person of significant control in TRIFC, If the TRIFC is to become no more where does that leave Mr Johnston as for the last some what three years he has still not been passed as a person fit and proper enough to get a place on the TRFC board.
Mr Johnstons ramblings and last rally call may just be his last before he is moved on.
Jesus when you think about it two crackpot chairmen who were on the last ibrox board when it died can’t get passed as fit and proper to have a place on this ibrox board, yet the media give them all the air time they want to protest it is the same club when both were part of the problem that saw the old club die.
I will tell you something that ibrox crowd do hold onto the past and even if you did something to the club it is ok as you will be forgiven as you were part of the club when it was cheating to win everything.
Anybody know why BBC Sport have listed FA Cup kick of times as 12.31 , 15.01 or 17.31 ? .And maybe mad people like following mad people .
upthehoops 4th January 2020 at 10:57
"The Mark Walters incident…remains a shameful stain on our history that can't be eradicated."
I was recently having a similar discussion with someone who pointed out something that I had previously been unaware of or I had simply missed at the time.
I was referred to the documentary with the "previously unseen footage" of the dressing room at Ibrox post-match. The YouTube listing gives a clue to the content; Mo Johnston, a Catholic & ex-Celtic player singing The Billy Boys.
I vaguely recalled the attendance and participation of Graeme Souness, Chic Young, Jimmy Bell, Terry Butcher, Richard Gough, John Brown and others but I had to have it pointed out to me that in the middle of the group singing "Fuck your Pope and the Vatican" with gusto was the said Mark Walters who was being as enthusiastic (or bigoted, if you prefer) as the rest.
Racist behaviour should be condemned but on the "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone" basis Mark Walters might not be the best or the most credible witness.
paddy malarkey 4th January 2020 at 12:18
Anybody know why BBC Sport have listed FA Cup kick of times as 12.31 , 15.01 or 17.31 ? .And maybe mad people like following mad people .
==============================
It's to promote mental health awareness. All games are kicking of 1 minute “late”.
easyJambo 4th January 2020 at 12:25
Erm , that looks crass . Sorry , unintentional .
Aren't TRFC awaiting a possible EL sanction for their fans' vocal support ? Noticed that the home leg ticket prices have been announced , with sale dates .They've oviously been told there will be no stand closure.
At the acknowledged risk of reigniting the OC/NC debate, I read Auldheid’s link above to a 2012 BBC article about Sir David Murray’s part in the demise of Rangers with interest, not least because Craig Whyte’s purchase of the club was accurately described in terms of the Craig Whyte-led consortium buying Murray's 85% share-holding for £1.
Leaving aside the symbolic, if somewhat comical nature of the sum involved, it is readily apparent that the purchase of the club, Rangers Football Club, indeed any incorporated football club, involves the purchase of shares in what history rewriters might describe as the operating company, which they assure us is a separate entity to the club – despite the patently obvious flaw that if they’ve merely bought shares in a company, then they clearly haven’t purchased the immortal, ethereal, metaphysical ‘idea’ that is the club, since it apparently isn’t part of the company entity that was purchased, according to their own theory.
Anybody who has read Ian Murray’s book, ‘This Is Our Story’ about the financial collapse, administration, near-death, and subsequent rebuilding of Heart of Midlothian FC, will know only too well how long and difficult a task administrator Bryan Jackson had in obtaining the club’s share-holding from Lithuania in order to preserve the history of the club and avoid going down the newco route, something which he miraculously achieved at the eleventh hour.
All of which begs the question, why would anyone buy shares in order to take control of a seemingly meaningless, expendable company which isn’t the club? Why did David Murray buy Lawrence Marlborough’s majority share-holding in 1988 if he was purchasing a company, not a club? Of course, Charles Green didn’t purchase a share-holding in Rangers in 2012, because Rangers was heading for liquidation, which is why he bought some assets before successfully deluding the gullible into believing that the world is flat.
Finally, supporters of the club currently playing out of Ibrox (indeed supporters of any club) should read the aforementioned ‘This Is Our Story’, where they would discover the grim reality of a club at death’s door and the subsequent mass mobilisation of a Hearts support prepared to invest millions of pounds to save the club they love.
In the absence of any further details, I guess 'Tunnelgate' didn't actually happen then, after the Glasgow derby? Curious.
Today's copy/paste instructions to the SMSM included the latest club 'connected' with Morelos: allegedly Bologna this time.
It would indeed set the cat amongst the pigeons if TRFC did receive a significant bid from any club, whether it was £10M, £20M or whatever, [or the rumoured Release Clause value.]
Gerrard wants to keep his best players to keep his title – and SC – challenge alive.
RIFC needs the cash.
And IF Morelos was sold this month, would Gerrard get to see any of the transfer fee deposit to fund a replacement?
Realistically, I don't think Morelos will leave this month.
Additionally, the temperamental player could become unsettled – if an unacceptable bid(s) was rejected by TRFC…
Which would be nice.
LUGOSI 4th January 2020 at 12:25
I vaguely recalled the attendance and participation of Graeme Souness, Chic Young, Jimmy Bell, Terry Butcher, Richard Gough, John Brown and others but I had to have it pointed out to me that in the middle of the group singing "Fuck your Pope and the Vatican" with gusto was the said Mark Walters who was being as enthusiastic (or bigoted, if you prefer) as the rest.
=================
I get that, but the racism against Walters was a shocking event in my view.
Walking through the park this morning and paused to watch a local game between what appeared to be under 14's.It was well attended spectator wise but I was shocked..hmm no not shocked but annoyed and irritated by the abuse the referee was subjected to. The referee has given up his time and energy to support and foster the future of the game, some of the abuse from all quarters of the sidelines bordered on threatening, it was constant and foul. I have no comment on the competence of the official but after ten minutes of listening I moved on . The SAFA have guidlines issued to members but from what I witnessed today it wouldn't go amiss to remind members regularly via players and parents that such abuse is counterproductive and on a human level plainly wrong.
Standards of Behaviour
The following is provided as general guidance for behaviour at games. This guidance will be further developed to form a full "Code of Conduct" which players, officials, clubs and supporters are expected to adhere to as a "Gold Standard".
1. The Scottish Amateur Football Association will not condone the drinking of alcohol at any games held under its jurisdiction.
2. Club officials are reminded that they are responsible for the conduct of spectators at their home matches, and visiting clubs are expected to co – operate with any reasonable requests made to them in this context. The Executive Committee will take action against any club reported to them in this regard.
3. Since most of our games are played on public pitches, players and officials should control the use of foul and abusive language. Quite apart from any instructions laid down by the football authorities, it is important that the Association/League creates a good public image, and everyone involved in Scottish amateur football has a duty to ensure that the existing high standards are maintained at all times.
4. Members of the Executive, especially the Office-Bearers, are available to assist clubs and officials at all times
I tried to post this earlier and it's in moderation , because of one word , I think . If this is acceptable , could the Mods bin the first draft ?
Since we're away to Alloa and the trains through there are gubbed , I'm stuck here with a shopping list and am between excursions . On the racism thing , I remember in the olden days going to Hampden to see a Old Firm cup final , when anybody could stoat up and pay at the gate . Me and my mates were in the enclosure , with the baying hordes to our left and our right . Paul Wilson was playing , and the racial abuse he got from one side whenever he touched the ball or dared to go near the sidelines was horrendous . Then the CFC supporters started singing "Oh , I'd rather be a darkie than a H*n ". Bet that cheered him up . He scored a cracking goal though , before we left to avoid the inevitable confrontations .
And I know it's inadvertent not inadvertant . My spelling is gtting atroshus .
https://twitter.com/mickmccahill/status/1213449360740147200?s=21
Déja vue from 2015.
Paddy M.
Interesting stuff from Paul Wilson.
Loved him at the Well
https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/celtic/in-full/interview-paul-wilson-on-stein-celtic-and-racial-abuse-in-the-1970s-1-1901659
Article from today's Herald regarding the SFA and the 2011 licence application.
https://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/18138440.sfa-remain-quiet-rangers-uefa-licence-charges/
===============================
Almost 20 months since the SFA’s compliance officer hit Rangers with two charges concerning their application for a licence to play in Europe in 2011/12, the ruling body continues to do nothing to take matters forward.
The last act of Clare Whyte’s predecessor, Tony McGlennan, was – following an eight-month investigation – to issue the charges against Rangers in June 2018 after sworn statements made in court during the trial of former owner Craig Whyte revealed that the board at Ibrox had been made aware in January, 2011, of money owed to HMRC regarding what became known as the Wee Tax Case, when payments were made to several players under the Discounted Option Scheme in an attempt to dodge tax.
UEFA insists that all clubs taking part in their competitions must declare overdue tax payable. However, Rangers claimed in their submission for a licence in 2011 that they had no overdue payables and that they were “in discussions” over a disputed tax bill.
However, Rangers directors testified during the Whyte trial that the club knew the tax bill was overdue in November, 2010. As a result of their application being granted, Rangers were allowed to compete in the qualifying rounds of the Champions League (where they were eliminated by Malmo) and the Europa League (where they lost out to Maribor); had their application been rejected – as it should have been – then Celtic, runners-up in the SPL in 2011, would have taken their place in the Champions League.
That alleged obfuscation formed the basis of the first charge, as was revealed in a letter sent by the SFA to all member clubs in September, 2017, which also explained the second charge by explaining that Rangers did not observe the rules that: "All members shall:- (a) observe the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship in accordance with the rules of fair play; (b) be subject to and comply with the articles and any statutes, regulations, directives, codes, decisions and international match calendar promulgated by the board, the Professional Game Board, the Non-Professional Game Board, the Judicial Panel Protocol, a committee or sub-committee, FIFA, UEFA or the Court of Arbitration for Sport; (f) behave towards the Scottish FA and other members with the utmost good faith."
Sanctions available for the latter breach range from a £1,000 fine up to "£5,000,000 and/or ejection from the Scottish Cup and/or exclusion from the Scottish Cup and/or any player registration restrictions and/or suspension and/or termination of membership and/or any sanction or disposal not expressly provided above".
Rangers immediately argued that the SFA, as a result of the secret Five-Way Agreement they and the SPFL signed in 2012 following the descent into liquidation of the old club, had no jurisdiction in this case and that the matter could only be heard by the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Switzerland, an opinion upheld by the SFA’s own judicial panel in June, 2018. Since then, nothing.
When I pressed him on the matter in June of last year, SFA chief executive Ian Maxwell said: “I would expect that to come back to the board in the not too distant future.
“It [going to CAS] is still under consideration. We’ll come back on that in due course. I wouldn’t want to put a timescale on it . . . but I don’t think we would let it go for ever.”
We asked the SFA on Tuesday whether a decision had been arrived at concerning the next step in this procedure. They said they would get back to us but there has yet to be a response from them.
Alastair Johnston, a director of Rangers International Football Club, this week gave an interview in which he taunted Celtic supporters who claim that the current Rangers is a separate entity from the club which imploded in 2012.
"You know what?” he asked. “If that was the end of Rangers and Celtic and if that was the end of the big game that started in 1888 [the first Old Firm meeting] all the way to 2012 – we won that game.
"The way you determine it by the number of times (54) we won the top division. We were ahead in February, 2012 and in head-to-head victories, we were ahead of Celtic in 2012.
"So if you wanted to say the old Rangers of 1872 died – we beat you 2-0 and when the game started again in 2012, it will be 120 years or so before you can tie with us.”
Mr Johnston was removed from the board at Ibrox by Whyte in 2011, but not before he declared in the club’s interim accounts that year that the Wee Tax Bill was a “potential” liability rather than an actual, overdue one.
It’s understood that it is his signature which appears on the UEFA application which the SFA now believes was consequently awarded in error. Curiously, though, they seem reluctant to proceed with their charges.
UTH @ 11.09
"following the descent into liquidation of the old club."
I wonder how long those words will remain before a 'correction' is made, following vociferous protests from the Propaganda Loyal?
At least the Herald is belatedly holding the SFA to account on this protracted issue, even if it is only one solitary article on the subject.
The problem the football authorities have is one of their own making. They've voluntarily signed up to a legally binding five-way agreement not to punish Charles Green's creation in any way for the sins of its deceased predecessor, while otherwise guaranteeing to treat the new club as if it was the former. In doing so, they've ensured that Rangers* are treated entirely differently to all other Scottish clubs, not least in terms of misdemeanours and (lack of) punishment.
Realistically of course, there is no logical reason why the new club should pay for the sins of the dead one, but it's obvious that the SFA wants to avoid any discussion which endangers or casts doubt on their 'club continuity' policy, so I can foresee an outcome of 'no need for raking over old coals' advice from their pet QC.
Of course the football authorities tying themselves in legal knots back in 2012 was all done "for the good of Scottish football", so that's alright.
Highlander 5th January 2020 at 12:19
"following the descent into liquidation of the old club."
I wonder how long those words will remain before a 'correction' is made, following vociferous protests from the Propaganda Loyal?
===========================
I have already seen protests on one Rangers fans forum about the wording. More interestingly there is one poster claiming to know for a fact the SFA view the matter as closed, and are just working out how to deal with the fallout.
On Thursday we had Alastair Johnston talking mince in the SMSM about 'continuity Rangers' – whilst nonchalantly dropping in derogatory comments about CFC supporters. Playing to the Ibrox gallery.
We have speculated on the timing and motivation.
Now, we learn that The Herald asked questions of the SFA about the disputed UEFA Licence – on Tuesday.
Is Johnston responding to this media attention of the original Rangers, directed at Hampden?
More interesting, IMO: The Herald has been just as inept / complicit when reporting on all things Ibrox. The paper is not known for any form of 'investigative journalism' – especially WRT mere football matters.
So, WHO prodded The Herald to approach the SFA with a very unwelcome query on the progress of the UEFA Licence complaint?
Mibbees I'm being too cynical, but this UEFA Licence query has appeared off the back of another controversial Glasgow derby…
StevieBC 5th January 2020 at 13:36
'…UEFA Licence query has appeared off the back of another controversial Glasgow derby…'
+++++++++++++++
Are you thinking that there may be a 'tunnelgate' story that is of greater concern to TRFC?
If so, I wonder what it might be that's got the Herald ready to step in with what is a significant deflection ?
Or is something happening on the Res 12 front?
I wish we had a newspaper that we could trust!
Highlander 5th January 2020 at 12:19
"following the descent into liquidation of the old club."
++++++++++++++++++++
Whatever else they are, the 'deniers' of the end result of 'Liquidation' are quite inventive in their use of language. I like the phrase
'…..before going through liquidation…….' to ' emerge'…' . as used in Johnson's 'statement' of the other day.
Trouble is that RFC of 1872 has not emerged from anything: it still languishes[ under a different name deliberately designed to mislead] in shameful liquidation, huge debts unpaid, creditors stiffed, with no shareholding in the SPFL, and no membership of the SFA.
JC, as per, I don't have a Scooby what's really going on!
It's just the sudden urgency which seems weird.
The SFA has been sitting on the UEFA Licence charge for almost 2 years now.
And then – on Hogmanay of all days – The Herald has a desperate urge to contact the SFA for an immediate, progress update…?
Come to think of it: where there any SFA blazers actually snoozing inside the Hampden offices on Tuesday anyway?
Confused.com
PMGB may well have the answer to 'why now?', on the Herald article, at least, though possibly also to the question of why has the OC/NC debate been reopened by the very people who should want it closed down?
https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2020/01/05/are-celtic-finally-getting-serious-on-the-resolution-12-issue/
Interesting, AJ.
So, on the face of it perhaps, the Res.12 update is personalizing the UEFA Licence charge, and with further proof?
i.e. "It woz Johnston wot dunnit ?"
To counter this: Johnston has appealed indirectly to the bears for their 'support', by reinforcing his commitment to the Ibrox cause via his recent witterings in the SMSM?
i.e. any action / attack on Johnston is an attack on 'Rangers'… followed by the usual threats, complaints, online polls, etc.
Mibbees?
StevieBC 5th January 2020 at 17:44
'..i.e. any action / attack on Johnston is an attack on 'Rangers'… followed by the usual threats, complaints, online polls, etc.'
++++++++++++++++
As far as I understand matters, StevieBC, it is important to note that the principal thrust of the Res 12 Requisitioners is against the SFA, and not against RIFC plc or TRFC Ltd.
The basic allegation is that RFC of 1872 lied to the SFA Licensing Committee, which in turn, passed on ( possibly in collusion) untruthful information to UEFA, and that on the basis of an untruth the Licensing Committee abused their delegated powers to award a licence that ought not to have been awarded, with the possible knowledge and collusion of the SFA Board as a whole.
Neither TRFC nor RIFC plc was, or could have been, involved in any possible fiddle to do with the awarding of a UEFA Competitions licence to RFC of 1872 in 2011, for the very obvious reason that neither was in existence at the time.
Only individual persons at RIFC plc/TRFC Ltd who were directors of RFC of 1872 at the material time could conceivably be alleged to have been party (under the collective liability of directors) to any potential fiddle!
It's clearly of far greater importance to investigate the question of whether the very Governance body was, is, guilty of what would be a shocking abuse of office than to worry about the potential cheating and lying of a single club which is now in Liquidation.
If there was lying on the part of RFC of 1872, then of course, some sanction such as retrospective expulsion would have to be applied to RFC of 1872 and to any and/or all of its directors in office at the time.
In other words, Res12 is not, except very indirectly, an attack on TRFC/RIFC: it is an attempt to have the possibility that there might have been collusive corruption by the Governance body in a monstrous act of deception involving one member club and several millions of pounds.
The allegations with good prima facie grounds for them are out there, and simply must be investigated by an independent , external body that itself could not be accused of partiality or partisanship.
For the sake of Scottish Football and the integrity of sport, not for the sake of 'Rangers bashing'
@John Clark 5th January 2020 at 16:36
I prefer this one the truth, '…..before going through liquidation” (coma)” …….' to ' (never ) merge'…' . alas there was no CVA life support switched on, 8 minutes was all it took for the oxygen to leave the brain dead; starved of willing donors who never arrived when needed most.
I've just read a valid point about the UEFA Licence issue on another site. If it is decided that Rangers weren't entitled to that licence in 2011, would the resulting loss of European income suffered by Celtic constitute a football debt to be paid by Rangers* as per the terms of the five-way agreement?
Highlander, that is a good point.
And, I suppose it could be argued that this football debt to CFC simply hadn't actually 'crystallised' at the time of the 5WA approval… but is still valid / payable?
I appears that any mention of the article in The Herald has been purged from the Ibrox fans's sites . No threats , no denials . Self-imposed purdah ?
RES12
http://etims.net/?p=15121
Are we in the endgame now?
Corrupt official 6th January 2020 at 08:02
RES12 http://etims.net/?p=15121
=========
It's good timing: immediately after the holiday break has ended – and towards the beginning of the winter break.
So, no local SPL footy to distract from whatever the Res.12 guys release to the public over the next couple of weeks?
Now, this could get very awkward for the Hampden numpties…
I hope!
StevieBC 6th January 2020 at 10:38 Corrupt official 6th January 2020 at 08:02 RES12 http://etims.net/?p=15121 ========= It's good timing: immediately after the holiday break has ended – and towards the beginning of the winter break. So, no local SPL footy to distract from whatever the Res.12 guys release to the public over the next couple of weeks? Now, this could get very awkward for the Hampden numpties… I hope!
______________________
It certainly should be made very awkward for them, if as we expect, revelations during this week are too big to be ignored/washed over by the SMSM. But, even with no football to write about, and, so far, very little transfer movement, watch out for an increase in the Ibrox 'signing target' stories and drooling articles about Gerrard and anything else they can pad their pages out with to avoid touching on one of the biggest scandals ever known in Scottish football. Strangely enough, all of the biggest scandals in Scottish football centre around the clubs whose home ground is/was Ibrox.
AllyJambo @12.02
“Strangely enough, all of the biggest scandals in Scottish football centre around the clubs whose home ground is/was Ibrox.”
I’m sure a perfectly reasonable explanation will be forthcoming. Nothing to see here, let’s all move on for the good of Scottish football etc, etc, etc.
Ryan Christie's two game "bawgate" ban has apparently been upheld.
I should be quite surprised by the decision, but nothing that the C.O. and the SFA's tribunals do these days surprises me.
easyJambo 6th January 2020 at 17:29
Just need to wait to see if Messers Morelos and Kent are cited for their gestures to opposition supporters ,or if she deems them to be acceptable for all players to mimic .
Paddy
Don't hold your breath on this issue, and I'm prepared to 'eat humble pie' if I'm proved wrong…
… but I don't think Morelos and/or Kent will be cited.
It will be a shocking dereliction of duty by the SFA (given the vile actions), and I'm astonished that CFC have not responded by immediately calling this out via a challenging and powerful statement.
How can they let their supporters down with such a pathetic, passive response ("We will be writing to the SFA" – and saying what?) and apparent ineptitude?
Back from the pub , and was in a mixed group of friends . Two TRFC supporters (male) reckon that Christie only got "done" to mitigate the sh*te that's about to fall about their heads . The CFC lady was "incensed", because it looks like different strokes for different folks (shown my age and our taste in music) . The way I see it is that he ( Snr Morelos ) is toxic for Scottish football , regardless which club he plays for . I look at him in the same way as I look at Louis Suarez , and wouldn't want him near my team , even National . I see him as a third rate Neymar da Silva Santos Júnior , but reckon that might be one of his role models .
Kent is just a daft boy caught up in the adulation – he'll never get that anywhere else . And obviously , since the statement of reprimand from his manager and his club (cough) , he won't be doing it again as it goes against their principles of honesty and dignity . Or so I'm told . ( How much are they paying for their PR p*sh ? That was free . Might need a replacement 8 button soon though !
I cannot be alone in thinking that Peter Lawwell is absolutely delighted to have the DR speak about " seething Celtic " , and the Herald reporting Celtic's call for " a fair and consistent' system , and glad to have the SMSM help him in deflecting discussion away from the Res 12 issue.
If the Celtic board had insisted, absolutely insisted, on a full independent investigation 7 years ago into the allegations of corruption over governance issues more important that the individual on-field crimes of football players, Scottish Football might well have been set on a proper basis of consistent fairness and general sporting integrity.
Calling for a rescission of red cards when your shareholders might have been ripped off a good few million quid …….. !
I ask you, where is there any sense in that? Red cards will happily be rescinded if that avoids any push for investigation into more serious matters.
The red card and the getures issues sum up our corrupt SFA. These issues like all issues involving this new club are controversial. Since 2011 the SFA have proved they are not fit for any purpose. EBTs were declared earnings by SC which meant over 50 players were registered illegally with the SFA. No action taken to this day. DOS bill was crystallised before 31 March and at Craig Whyte trial Mr Murray and other directors accepted this under oath, no action taken. All involved in the SFA during this period should be taken to task. ALL involved in 5 Way Agreement should also be taken to task. In fact why do we not exactly know what it contained. No punishment for this level of cheating is unacceptable. Our smsm are not only not fit for purpose but are openly abetting this issue. As fans we are more or less told to ignore all this by SFA and smsm and advised to move on. If we accept this then like the movie "you get what you f****** deserve" This could only happen in Scotland and its sad to say but we all know why.
I'm thinking that the CFC Board is either stoopid or deceitful.
A year ago we had the controversial Glasgow derby, which resulted in supporters being thoroughly confused at the referee's performance – and the disciplinary process.
CFC made some noises at that time and the end result was a wee sit down for the SPL managers in Perth in February.
This 'Referees Summit' ended without any stated actions/deadlines. VAR got a mention.
Shortly after this meeting, TRFC was awarded a 'world record' 4 [four] penalties in a game against St.Mirren.
Does anybody think that the refereeing has improved this season?
Then last week the Glasgow derby created similar controversies and confusion – even down to a similar, groin grabbing foul.
Again, CFC has made noises.
So, why the hell should the CFC Board expect ANYTHING different to happen this time?
And the CFC Board doesn't normally come across as being stoopid…
'bect67 6th January 2020 at 22:29
…Don't hold your breath on this issue, and I'm prepared to 'eat humble pie' if I'm proved wrong…
… but I don't think Morelos and/or Kent will be cited…'
############################
Upon reflection, I assume that the gestures made by Kent after scoring, and not acted-upon (missed?) by the referee at the time, can only have been judged as a yellow card offence & therefore not subject to retrospective action from the Compliance Officer.
The Morelos one is interesting. I don't think there's a procedure whereby a player can receive a third yellow card when leaving the pitch after receiving a second caution & a red card. It should have been a straight red on the day under IFAB Law 12, ‘using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gestures’ (but wasn't), and therefore subject to retrospective action by the Compliance Officer under JPP Rules 202, 203 or 204, shouldn't it?
Phil's latest blog is an eye-opener.
Feels like the winds around Parkhead could soon start blowing in another direction – IF true…