Scottish Football and the case for a Bismarck!

Bybroganrogantrevinoandhogan

Scottish Football and the case for a Bismarck!

Good Evening.

When considering any type of protracted negotiation or discussion that seems to be going on too long, there is a story that is always worth remembering– whether it is actually a true story or not as the case may be.

It is said, that heads of state all met at a congress in what is now modern Germany sometime after the Franco Prussian war of 1870-1871.The entire congress was being run almost singlehandedly by the then Prussian Chancellor Otto von Bismark and he was keen to get all the necessary signatures on paper to seal some deal or other.

However, others at the congress were not too keen to sign up to certain elements of the proposed deal and so they hithered and dithered and in the eyes of Bismark they simply waisted time by concentrating on the minutiae- the little matters, with a view to ensuring their own interests were best served in these small areas– and did not focus on the big issue.

Having tried to talk these others round and educate them in his own beliefs and point of view on the bigger picture without any success, Bismark grew weary of the continuing delay and the posturing of his colleagues. All attempts at reason and diplomacy had failed in his eyes and so he decided to take a different tack.

Accordingly, it is said that whilst others were still inside debating endlessly on this matter or that, Bismark left the building and began simply shooting the windows in with the aid of a riffle which he just happened to have handy.

Those inside were naturally alarmed at this turn of events. They soon forgot about the minutiae under debate, they abandoned the previously expressed self interest and simply signed up so that they could get away from the mad chancellor and his house.

Job done so to speak.

Whilst I do not in anyway condone the behaviour of Otto von Bismark in this instance, and have no doubt that he was an autocrat, what I will say is that he believed that there was too much time being spent on the unimportant stuff and not enough time recognising what really needed doing– from his point of view of course.

Today– and it seems every day for months— we have endless debate about the future of Scottish Football. League reconstruction and the redistribution of footballing wealth has become a marathon– even before it has started.

Yet I believe that at the moment all parties concerned are not focusing on the radical reform that is fundamentally needed which is the creation of one, strong, properly structured and constituted body which is capable of the proper and ethical governance of Scottish Football and the business that surrounds football.

No matter what system you try, or distribution you agree, without proper sensible strong governance you are wasting your time.

Further, whatever body is set up, and whoever is chosen to be its CEO (or whatever the head honcho is going to be called), they must tackle the issue of corporate and fiscal compliance and the proper administration of any body corporate which actively takes part in Scottish Football– and that includes any such body or person who is involved in the running of a member club.

In addition, in so dealing with any corporate malfeasance or chicanery or whatever, the rules have to be applied with a rod of iron by an iron body.

As we can now clearly see, Football clubs and football in general is not, and never will be, immune from the effects of bad corporate governance and on occasion downright manipulation of facts, figures and contracts.

Whilst great play has been made of the fact that Gavin Masterton has handed over his shares in Dunfermline FC ( or its holding company ) the fact of the matter is that this in no way solves the problem faced by the football club. Whoever gains control of that club will still have to rent the ground from Mr Masterton’s company– and it is a rent that the club may just not be able to afford.

Ever!

It is only my opinion of course, but I am of the view that Mr Masterton has sealed a loan deal with his bankers which is of a type and duration which could not normally be achieved by other borrowers. The Loan has a lengthy period during which no repayments are necessary and interest can continue to accrue.

All very good you may say, but the level of debt concerned is not one that appears to be sustainable by Dunfermline FC and so whoever buys the club as a going concern ( if anyone buys it at all ) will have to pay an agreed rental to Gavin Masterton– and if the rental is not sufficient to repay Mr Masterton’s lenders, then I suspect that the end game here will be a search to find a buyer for the ground at some point over the next twenty years or so, with the hope that as part of the deal a space will be found somewhere for a new ground like New St Mirren park– the difference being that in that instance St Mirren were in charge of their future whereas Dunfermline are not.

The Governance of that club and the financial arrangements behind the club should have been looked at and examined by the SFA long before now– and the Dunfermline fans warned about the dangers of any such arrangements. Effectively those finance arrangements, should they continue, will probably mean that the club will have no option but to move from its established home!

All to suit one man!

Thankfully Dundee were spared a full takeover by Giovanni Di Stefano, however is it not a bit worrying that this man who has been jailed for over 14 years for various fraudulent acts, was allowed to roam around Scottish Football for a prolonged period?

Not so long ago Di Stefano did play a part at Dens, was in line to buy almost 30% of the shareholding, and was oft quoted in the papers and so on. The thing is that there were those who were prepared to give him a place at the Dundee table and in so doing invited him into Scottish Football.

Surely the SFA, had they been inclined to, could quite easily have pointed out that many of the claims of Mr Di Stefano were at least dubious if not completely incorrect? Yet nothing was being said at the time and silence prevailed.

Whilst not in the same calibre as Di Dtefano, Vladimir Romanov has now been at Hearts for a prolonged period. While I have no quibbles about the legality of Romanov’s takeover of Hearts, any money of a sizeable size which is transferred into Scotland from a foreign country will be subject to scrutiny by the Crown office to ensure that it is clean. Lithuania in particular is said to have a banking system which is governed loosely and sometimes does not meet the compliance standards expected in this country.

With his bank having gone bust, Romanov still retains the majority shareholding at Tynecastle, but there are questions still to be answered about what has happened at Hearts but life will be very different for the Edinburgh club going forward.

Again– could the SFA have done more to monitor the situation and could they have demanded clarity and detail from the Hearts owner as to his business dealings and the detailed arrangements with his bank?

At Ibrox, well things just go from the weird and inexplicable to downright astonishing– and all through a tremendous amount of smoke and mirrors.

It is clear that the SFA have no idea what to believe from Charles Green or for that matter Craig Whyte. On the face of it, there are clear links between Whyte and Green with the former paying over a six figure sum in return for absolutely nothing it would appear– with similar transactions going between Whyte’s colleague, Aiden Early, and Charles Green.

What is clear is that Green gave a clear undertaking to the SFA that he had nothing whatsoever to do with Whyte and would have nothing to do with Whyte going forward. Now, at the very least he is admitting that he met Whyte on several occasions, and whilst he may have made representations to Craig Whyte— these were all lies designed only to get Whyte to where Green wanted him.

This is hardly the act of someone who has been bona fides in his business dealings either with Whyte or with the SFA as the licensing body.

It is against this background that the Scottish Football Agencies need to wake up before they find the fans of the game ( at least those who want to stay interested in the game ) doing a Bismarck and panning in the windows of this whole house of cards.

Football Clubs, football fans, and indeed football itself needs protected from the financial and corporate shenanigans, and the governing body must be much more active and permanently vigilant in watching out for and if necessary anticipating the people and the transactions which have and will jeopardise clubs and the game in general going forward.

It is clearly no longer acceptable to rely on self regulation or mere declarations and undertakings from the clubs themselves. The Administrators must be much more active and employ far greater professional expertise in carrying out an almost constant analytical and reporting function in relation to club finance and corporate regulation.

All and any changes in funding, boardroom changes, investor changes and anything else major should be the subject of immediate and proper scrutiny by the SFA and there should be fair, immediate and stiff sanctions for non compliance, and any type of dilatory behaviour on the part of club officials who would seek to conceal the truth or who fail to properly disclose vital matters which should be out in the open.

Further, the funding detail– such as the never ending loan re Dunfermline should be a matter of public record in all its detail so that fans and investors can make information based value judgements when dealing with any club.

Such stiffer regulation should not develop into anything like a corporate witch hunt or any kind of draconian big brother syndrome, however the need for change given all of the current troubles is obvious to one and all.

Further, the attempted fudge surrounding Rangers league status last summer and the ongoing disquiet surrounding the position of Campbell Ogilvie does nothing to boost faith in and the reputation of Football Administration in Scotland.

Things are far from clear and there appears to be continual dithering and fudging. No one has any idea where the Nimmo Smith Report has gone nor what import it is to have— if any. Why is that?

Dithering and bumbling over detail is no longer an option. Strong clear governance is required to protect the game from being hijacked by those who have their own corporate and financial agendas.

Such people cannot be allowed to determine the way Scottish Football runs  or to conduct themselves in a fashion that leaves football and everyone involved in limbo.

It is time for Scottish Football to find its own Iron Chancellor!  There is a need for someone who will, if necessary, come along and shoot the lights out of any club or Company Director who wishes to play fast and loose with the game of football.

About the author

broganrogantrevinoandhogan author

Boot wearing football, sport & total nonsense fan-- Gourmet, Bon Viveur and eedgit! - Oh and I write a bit occasionally!

5,402 Comments so far

therampantbaronPosted on7:23 pm - May 7, 2013


Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 13:
More importantly what do the players say if the taxman comes knocking?
———————————————————-
In Billy Dodd’s case “the lights are on but there’s no one in” ?

View Comment

broganrogantrevinoandhoganPosted on7:26 pm - May 7, 2013


Alan Brazil just tweeting that he does not believe that Rangers have voted to get rid of the chairman and that the story is incorrect

View Comment

BartinMainPosted on7:38 pm - May 7, 2013


What’s the significance of the Alan Brazil tweet, BRTH?

View Comment

broganrogantrevinoandhoganPosted on7:40 pm - May 7, 2013


Good Evening

Madbhoy/Chipm0nk/redetin

Re my theorising today and the comments about HMRC chasing the new co for tax etc in the event of the UTT siding with HMRC.

First of all the company that was the employer ( Rangers PLC ) is in liquidation so I don’t think that HMRC will go there to recover the tax– unless there has been some move in the interim by BDO to annul the sale to Sevco– and there is no evidence to support any such move thus far.

However, a very different scenario arises if HMRC go knocking on the door of the former players seeking recovery of tax.

Can anyone remember the exact terms of the indemnities granted in the side letters?

Were they granted by the Directors of Rangers PLC or by and on behalf of Rangers Football Club?

View Comment

broganrogantrevinoandhoganPosted on7:46 pm - May 7, 2013


Bartinmain

Apparently he believes the BBC report to be inaccurate

View Comment

scapaflow14Posted on8:05 pm - May 7, 2013


Mr Smith may be considering his position, allegedly unhappy that Mr Green took part in meeting and vote.

No new story from Alex Thomson, may have material breaking new ground late this week or early next.

View Comment

BartinMainPosted on8:13 pm - May 7, 2013


Why would Alan Brazil know anything, BRTH? Apparently there’s a Richard Wilson piece in tomorrow’s Herald that proves Chris McLaughlin “half- right”. Perhaps that means Richard is “half- wrong”, we’ll see!

View Comment

Bill1903Posted on8:14 pm - May 7, 2013


Alan Brazil is a friend of Murray apparently

View Comment

BartinMainPosted on8:15 pm - May 7, 2013


I didn’t know that.

View Comment

bailemeanachPosted on8:19 pm - May 7, 2013


Would some clarification from the Sevco director of comms chappie be out of the question following today’s claims by the banned journo?

View Comment

chipm0nkPosted on8:23 pm - May 7, 2013


Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 19:40

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

I do not believe they will go after the former players. In my opinion, and I claim no special knowledge in this, if anything they will go for the former owner and possibly directors.

As far as I am aware the players had letters of comfort (or whatever) that if there was any tax liability then the employer would deal with it.

The employer no longer exists i any real way, so the only option would be to go after the people who put those arrangements in place. In particular anyone who had benefited from the arrangement.

The first thing they will need to do though is establish the debt. To me that will be by arguing the tax point is when the payments were made into the trust, not when the payments were made out of it. That makes the notion of a loan irrelevant.

The money into the trust was a payment, not a loan. It was in fulfilment of a contractual agreement, making tax due at that point. I think they conceded the loans, as they were irrelevant. Now that they are the appellant, rather than the respondent, then they can argue this point. I personally think it will be the crux of their case.

View Comment

Bill1903Posted on8:25 pm - May 7, 2013


Brazil has often said he won’t say too much on the Rangers situation due to his friendship with Murray.
He has quite a few contacts in the city if you believe the guff he spouts

View Comment

tomtomPosted on8:34 pm - May 7, 2013


The only Murray Brazil’s friendly with is Ruby. 😀

View Comment

goosyPosted on8:36 pm - May 7, 2013


nawlite says:

Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 18:41
,,,,,,

If Murray goes, is this evidence that the spiv side has won for the moment?

I believe you have called it exactly right
I would also add
If Murray and Cardigan resign, Hart will be the only non-Spiv left. He too will be sorely tempted to walk
If not he will presented with fait accompli after fait accompli until he is in an impossible situation If he doesn`t go now he will have to go later

If indeed all 3 Rangers men resigned together I wouldn`t be a bit surprised if they took McCoist with them

Whatever happens the current situation is a watershed moment for the Bears

Implications?
We could be approaching the end game in the brief life of RIFC and TRFC

With no Rangers men on board the way is clear for a Green whitewash report followed by his return. The obvious aim is to rally fans for the upcoming ST sales

This could well be the last ST offer launched by the Spivs

Green`s pandering to the baser elements in the support ensures he retains some credibility. Other fans will prefer to believe a whitewash than contemplate reality

However

The ex-Directors would face an immediate dilemma

Having seen how Spivs operate when money is at stake they could also be wary of being compromised by dirty tactics
If they call for an ST boycott the Spivs could respond by pointing out that the club will have to close
Similarly they have no way of knowing whether Whyte was the only Spiv on the block who taped secret conversations
If any embarrassing comments by Murray and co have been taped by the Spivs they will be difficult to deny

The league reconstruction proposal confirms that TRFC are at least 2 yrs. away from an ST cash bonanza that could set them up for life if they liquidate immediately afterwards
It may be time to cut losses and run
If so
RIFC may well apply for a Members Voluntary Liquidation and put TRFC into administration in the upcoming close season
The Spivs would then divi up all cash in hand including ST monies

TRFC would be put up for sale on a sold as seen basis

So the dispute with Worthington would be an immediate problem for any new buyer of TRFC

We will know soon enough
Any Director resignation need to be advised to AIM in an RNS
This could happen as early as tomorrow

View Comment

broganrogantrevinoandhoganPosted on8:38 pm - May 7, 2013


Chipm0nk

The liquidator’s right to ask for a contribution from the former Directors of a Company in Liquidation towards the debts of that company is restricted to a certain extent and the Liquidator will have to show malfeasance/wrongful trading/unlawful trading etc.

The question is whether or not the players could be liable for any tax that remains unpaid as a result of payments made to them?

If so, there is a liability there which may have to be pursued before any Director could be found liable for the revenue’s shortfall– although admittedly the players may then be deemed to be a creditor as a result of a worthless indemnity.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on8:48 pm - May 7, 2013


alex thomson‏@alextomo6m
@SeamusGibbon I’m relaxed but they’re talking abt doing this on TV as well as Tomoblog. Ull appreciate this takes time.

——————–
If its important enough to go on National TV its worth waiting for.

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on8:51 pm - May 7, 2013


Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 19:26

Alan Brazil just tweeting that he does not believe that Rangers have voted to get rid of the chairman and that the story is incorrect

______________________________________________

Me neither. Rangers are in liquidation and don’t have a chairman.
Sevco (5088 or Scotland) or a new company called RIFC may or may not have.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on8:56 pm - May 7, 2013


I have seen it reported that Green and Ahmad both took part in the Rangers Board meeting by teleconference and indeed voted.

I find this difficult to understand as Ahmad was never a director of Rangers International FC Ltd so he certainly couldn’t vote and I don’t see, even though he is deemed a ‘key’ employee of RIFC Plc along with McCoist, how he could even take part in the meeting. By the same token I don’t understand how Green could take part as I thought he had resigned.

So I wondered. Could the Board Meeting have been of TRFCL rather than RIFC Plc. Green, Ahmad and Stockbridge are the 3 directors of TRFCL and I realise that it is a subsidiary to RIFC Plc but presumably till they are removed by the holding company Green and Ahmad remain directors of TRFCL. It’s just a thought especially with the story that the Beeb might not have got the story totally correct.

And then I notice that the role of Ian Hart in all this as a NED on RIFC Plc doesn’t seem to be attracting any attention. It’s always worth remembering the rather strange way in which his shares were purchased in RIFC Plc and his playing the reluctant virgin, after having been a Blue Knight, when he denied being an original Green consortium shareholding member. He said Green was incorrect in identifying him as a shareholder but later admitted he was and I’m not a gambling man but I would suspect that his shares cost him 1p each so he might have slightly divided or strained loyalties.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on9:10 pm - May 7, 2013


One thing I was quite surprised on the Beeb report was when Chris mentioned the personal issues involving Murray as I thought they had been laid to rest. If they have actually come back it’s hard to see that it’s not coming from the Green camp where they initially originated from.

I would also think that there are far more serious issues on the go than unspecified complaints from two supporters so I am having difficulty in understanding why it was raised again tonight.

View Comment

y4rmyPosted on9:17 pm - May 7, 2013


So let me get this straight: Malcolm Murray was (or wasn’t) given a vote of no confidence in a board meeting that took place (or didn’t take place) yesterday for RIFC plc (or TRFC Ltd). Charles Green who is no longer on the board (or who is still on the board) of RIFC (or TRFC Ltd) took part (or didn’t) in the vote.

View Comment

twopandaPosted on9:21 pm - May 7, 2013


Golly wot! – no real director changes – & SPL stuff a damp squid [till tomorrow`s MSM recycling]
Shucks
Back at the ranch – distinct lack of pennies carrying forward
How`s the weather NT?

View Comment

bangordubPosted on9:21 pm - May 7, 2013


y4rmy
Exactly.
WTF is going on?
Is this the real world or a circus?

Anyone?

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on9:34 pm - May 7, 2013


Whilst we think of governors in a political context as people and governments as a group of people who govern, there is another engineering definition of a governor which perhaps should be the “governing” definition.

” A governor, or speed limiter, is a device used to measure and regulate the speed of a machine, such as an engine. A classic example is the centrifugal governor, also known as the Watt or fly-ball governor, which uses weights mounted on spring-loaded arms to determine how fast a shaft is spinning, and then uses proportional control to regulate the shaft speed.”

In European football UEFA is the ultimate governor in the political sense but it is in the engineeering sense that they have failed in their job to stop the shaft from spinning out of control in some countries with its own national association..

OK there are some like Germany who use governors and some like England who are only now recognising that a governor is required in the EPL to prevent it spinning out of control, but UEFA plays a significant part in speeding up the shaft in countries not big enough to attract the kind of TV money bigger countries can rather than governing the speed of the shaft.

It does so by the distribution of CL money that sees it paid solely to the winners of national league competitions. It is feasible that Celtic could have access to an additional £15m a year for the next 5 years at least. The benefits are already seen in SB price reductions and it seems that that some of the income is going on generating further business capacity of Celtic and more will be needed to diversify income sources. However whilst £15m a year for 5 years is a lot of money it is unlikely to raise playing standards sufficiently to become genuine CL winners by attracting the sort of player who makes that possible.

So whilst always aspiring to go as far as possible in the CL the gap that this will create in domestic competition has to be recognised and that recognition could be addressed by UEFA becoming governors in the engineering sense and using some of the CL reward to pay title winners but also divert a percentage, say 33%, as a solidarity payment to the leagues to be used by clubs to develop their own and provide a safety net if a club, adopting sustainable policies, runs into difficulties for some unforeseen reason.

Had the rewards of CL money not been so great, perhaps a desperate Sir David Murray and a competitive Walter Smith would not have taken the punt they did in 2007/08 with Rangers future by spending £29M gross £9.5M net on a team that would win three titles to bring in CL money to pay for that same team.

The sad thing for me from this whole Rangers debacle is that I see no sign at all of any analysis from anyone, be it SFA or in the MSM., advocating an honest review of all the factors like inadequate licensing but including impact of CL cash distribution that has almost killed our game, with proposals to address them.

But if UEFA cannot recognise the part their failure as governors in the engineering sense is playing in destroying Scottish football, what chances our national association and member clubs could be more far sighted?

View Comment

neepheidPosted on9:37 pm - May 7, 2013


ecobhoy says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 21:10

One thing I was quite surprised on the Beeb report was when Chris mentioned the personal issues involving Murray as I thought they had been laid to rest.
+++++++++++++++++++
I’ve read the BBC report twice now, and can’t find any mention of Murray’s personal issues, just that he had a “rift” with Green. Am I missing something?

View Comment

Bill1903Posted on9:48 pm - May 7, 2013


He mentioned it on sportsound tonight

View Comment

Forres Dee (@ForresDee)Posted on9:50 pm - May 7, 2013


Previous post in moderation, edit :

ecobhoy says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 21:10

One thing I was quite surprised on the Beeb report was when Chris mentioned the personal issues involving Murray as I thought they had been laid to rest. If they have actually come back it’s hard to see that it’s not coming from the Green camp where they initially originated from.

I would also think that there are far more serious issues on the go than unspecified complaints from two supporters so I am having difficulty in understanding why it was raised again tonight.
===================================

I think its fair to say that Chris is getting his info from Green’s camp, hence his future plans exclusive and the banning from that great ‘rangers man’ James Traynor.

He also got out the traps first with the story about the vote of no confidence, he ought to be more careful, he could end up getting his fingers burnt, he’s being used in a propaganda war, but is he simply a willing player after future Rangers exclusives.

View Comment

john clarkePosted on9:57 pm - May 7, 2013


Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 19:40′
‘Can anyone remember the exact terms of the indemnities granted in the side letters?’
——–
From the Nimmo Smith report, Para 37

“.. Oldco gave a written undertaking to a .. player..

‘(1) that it would make fixed sum payments to the MGMRT either unconditionally,
except as to continuing registration with Rangers FC, on a specified date or dates or on
the occurrence of a specified event or events related to or connected with playing in an
official match;

(2) that it would recommend to the Trustees of the MGMRTthat they establish a sub
-trust,appoint the Specified Player as protector of the subtrust and transfer
to the subtrust sums equal to the payments to be made by Oldco to the MG
MRT
.
This undertaking was set out in a document addressed to the
Specified Player commonlyreferred to as a “side-letter”.

Not sure what kind of indemnity that might be against the player/ trust beneficiary being liable for tax!!

View Comment

neepheidPosted on10:00 pm - May 7, 2013


bill1903 says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 21:48
3 0 Rate This
He mentioned it on sportsound tonight
===============
Thanks.

View Comment

chipm0nkPosted on10:03 pm - May 7, 2013


Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 20:38

Chipm0nk

The liquidator’s right to ask for a contribution from the former Directors of a Company in Liquidation towards the debts of that company is restricted to a certain extent and the Liquidator will have to show malfeasance/wrongful trading/unlawful trading etc.

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

In my opinion that is one of the reasons Malcolm Cohen was given the gig by HMRC.

This is their statement at the time they rejected the CVA

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/news/rangers.htm

“A liquidation provides the best opportunity to protect taxpayers, by allowing the potential investigation and pursuit of possible claims against those responsible for the company’s financial affairs in recent years. A CVA would restrict the scope of such action. Moreover the liquidation route does not prejudice the proposed sale of the club. This sale can take place either through a CVA or a liquidation.

So the sale is not being undermined, it simply takes a different route. Liquidation will enable a sale of the football assets to be made to a new company, thereby ensuring that football will continue at Ibrox. It also means that the new company will be free from claims or litigation in a way which would not be achievable with a CVA. Rangers can make a fresh start.”

This is the BDO sites description of Mr Cohen’s particular area of expertise.

http://www.bdo.uk.com/find-a-partner/malcolm-cohen

Malcolm is a Licensed Insolvency Practitioner with thirty years business restructuring and insolvency experience. Malcolm has extensive knowledge across a range of sectors including professional services, financial services, property , shipping and not for profit. Malcolm leads the firms’ Contentious Insolvency Team, this team is dedicated to recovering assets through litigation, cross border investigations and uncovering fraud.

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

I am mindful of the fact that HMRC appeared to be willing to accept Duff and Phelps’ appointment as administrator, so long as they were appointed that day. However they were insistent on who was appointed liquidator, their choice.

View Comment

therampantbaronPosted on10:04 pm - May 7, 2013


Reporters should report facts; in war, truth is the first casualty and what is happening down Govan way is definitely war.

The ever present truth is that anyone covering TRFC or its predecessor is so desperate to get the scoop that he or she will swallow anything handed to them by anyone with the remotest connection to that place.

Chris McLaughlin walked triumphantly side by side with CW down Edmiston Drive 2 years ago – he is an utter patsy, used and abused by anyone he goes near with his keen eye and his clipboard.

At the moment there are at least 3 and possibly 5 camps around TRFC and some people are members of more than one camp.

All of them are jostling to place the story they want in the headlines; the gratuitous, ill-considered and unfounded reference to personal issues being at the root of the dissatisfaction with Murray M was clearly planted by the nasty Spiv tendency.

When Brazil contradicts a report that Murray was voted out, he may just be suggesting that whilst Murray is leaving, it is under his own steam and on his own terms. Let’s hope so.

Spivco will be desperate to gag Murray – let’s see if he’s a real Rangers man or not. A real Rangers man would walk for nothing and accept no gag. The fans deserve the truth, however unpalatable and no one is better placed then he to tell it, warts and all.

View Comment

therampantbaronPosted on10:07 pm - May 7, 2013


chipm0nk says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 22:03
—————————————
Don’t forget HMRC has powers to – Regulation 81 and Personal Liability Notices enable it to collect income tax and national insurance from directors and employees where the circumstances warrant it.

Both tools have been little used in the past 20 years but I have come across 3 cases in the last 6 months where HMRC have used both to tackle ill-disguised tax avoidance.

If the UTT finds in favour of HMRC, expect to see them deploy this tactic.

Meanwhile I am encouraged by reports of what BDO are up to – whilst I remain sceptical about any imminent financial collapse of TRFC and also of any action by AIM in relation to RIFC, I am cautiously optimistic that BDO may surprise us.

View Comment

Madbhoy24941Posted on10:26 pm - May 7, 2013


“Lauryn Hill: Fugees Star Jailed For Unpaid Tax”

Now I understand the circumstances are slightly different (well maybe not with the PAYE monies) but if it is proven that tax should have been paid but deliberately not, those individuals or organisations should be punished in a way that sends a message to others thinking of doing the same thing.

Does anyone think that individual or collective punishments served so far would act as a deterrent to others?

No? Me neither!

View Comment

scapaflow14Posted on10:26 pm - May 7, 2013


ecobhoy says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 20:56

There may be a simple explanation, viz

1. Mr Green announced that he was stepping down as CEO, which, and would be leaving the company at some future date. I think he is still a director of both RIFC and TRFCL.

2. Mr Ahmed said he was going, but the details are still being worked out, so he too remains a director of TRFCL for the moment.

3. Given that the investigation is into the conduct of, what is now, TRFCL in the acquisition of the assets, it would be desirable to have the directors of TRFCL at the RIFC meeting for those items that pertained to TRFCL

4. As I understand it, Mr Murray laid out his plan of action, and at some point asked for a vote of confidence. I think he lost it by one vote, with Mr Green voting. Were I Mr Murray, I would hold that Mr Green should have recused himself from voting, as the investigation is effectively investigating him, and Mr Green’s interests in this matter may not coincide with those of RIFC . Arguably, that conflict of interest would extend to any other directors of TRFCL who also sit on the board of RIFC.

Hence, Mr Murray could be arguing “I am staying put, because, the vote of no confidence may be invalid.”

I wonder if Mr Murray is not wishing tonight that he had forced the suspension of Mr Green a couple of weeks ago.

View Comment

rantinrobinPosted on10:31 pm - May 7, 2013


So I come home from an evening out only to find that there is a question mark surrounding the Murray walking away story.
So has Chris McLaughlin pursued the journalists’ rule book of finding two sources willing to go on record to corroborate the story prior to release?

Perhaps not.

When a hack says that he ‘understands’ that this has happened or may happen.Beware.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on10:48 pm - May 7, 2013


rantinrobin says:

Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 22:31

You would think the media would enlighten us eh?

Auldheid‏@Auldheid4h
@mikefstv Be interesting to know if it was him or his policies they had no confidence in & what exactly those policies were.Care to enlighten

View Comment

scapaflow14Posted on10:51 pm - May 7, 2013


Auldheid (@Auldheid) says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 22:48

Supposedly a piece in tomorrow’s Herald, but, we’ll see in a couple of hours!

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on11:19 pm - May 7, 2013


neepheid says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 21:37

ecobhoy says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 21:10

One thing I was quite surprised on the Beeb report was when Chris mentioned the personal issues involving Murray as I thought they had been laid to rest.
+++++++++++++++++++
I’ve read the BBC report twice now, and can’t find any mention of Murray’s personal issues, just that he had a “rift” with Green. Am I missing something?
====================================================

It was done to camera on tea-time news

View Comment

The CEPosted on11:24 pm - May 7, 2013


What’s all this reconstruction chat about? I was labouring under the impression that the evil Stewart Gilmour and his dastardly plan with Charles Green had successfully foiled our one and only ever chance of reconstruction?

View Comment

scapaflow14Posted on11:29 pm - May 7, 2013


The CE says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 23:24

Fitba chairmen are fickle, they changed their minds as often as they change their wigs….

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on11:36 pm - May 7, 2013


scapaflow14 says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 22:26

ecobhoy says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 20:56

4. As I understand it, Mr Murray laid out his plan of action, and at some point asked for a vote of confidence. I think he lost it by one vote, with Mr Green voting. Were I Mr Murray, I would hold that Mr Green should have recused himself from voting, as the investigation is effectively investigating him, and Mr Green’s interests in this matter may not coincide with those of RIFC . Arguably, that conflict of interest would extend to any other directors of TRFCL who also sit on the board of RIFC.

Hence, Mr Murray could be arguing “I am staying put, because, the vote of no confidence may be invalid.”
———————————————————————————————————-

Yea if that was the scenario then I wouldn’t walk either although I believe Green had a right to vote as he maintains he is innocent. He is after all a street fighter and if Murray was counting on him ‘playing nice’ then he will be eaten alive – he should have counted the votes on the basis that Green would be voting and therefore avoided a confidence motion.

I thought the blustering about Green coming back at an EGM was total moonbeams but now I wonder. Is this really worth it to get a hold of say £5-8 million in ST money when the fracas will cause a collapse in share price losing more money.

Do the spivs need a bit longer for their scheme which can only IMO involve sale and leaseback of Ibrox, sale of Auchenhowie, and possible sale or lease of bits of ground round Ibrox. Or is there someone in the wings ready to buy who can’t do so immediately for whatever reason?

Is Green just out to just destroy Rangers because his ego is bruised? He didn’t seem the type and if he does that he’ll lose on his shares. But there must be something that’s keeping them hanging-in there.

View Comment

The CEPosted on11:39 pm - May 7, 2013


scapaflow14 says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 23:29
0 0 Rate This

Indeed Scapa. So maybe a few people, and especially those on this blog who should have know better, will think a little bit before issuing wild smears and baseless accusations.

Roy MacGregor and Stewart Gilmour’s stand looks to have guaranteed the progressive and positive aspects of the reconstruction package whilst allowing us to eschew the car crash of 8-8-8.

Now all we need to do is get rid of 11-1.

View Comment

The CEPosted on11:47 pm - May 7, 2013


What where the cries I was being bombarded with a few weeks ago?

now or never

all or nothing

take it or leave it

View Comment

scapaflow14Posted on11:47 pm - May 7, 2013


ecobhoy says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 23:36

There’s an old acronym from back in the day that describes why people do things M. I. C. E. Money, Ideology, Corruption, Ego.

In this particular set of circumstances I think we can rule out the middle two, which leaves Money and Ego. Mr Green doesn’t seem to care much about things like reputation, so for me at any rate, its about money. The how is not yet clear. .

View Comment

The CEPosted on11:52 pm - May 7, 2013


To clarify ,I know the people that “run” the game have contempt for the actual paying customer – but to come out with this a couple of weeks after we were explicitly told that there was no option to cherrypick is a bit rich, even by the standards of these incompetents. In most industries – people with the pitiful track record of Doncaster & co would be out of a job but here they are allowed to continue un-hindered (they’ll probably even get a bonus for ushering in this brave new dawn at the 20th time of asking).

IMO – the position they have now reached is sensible and is a good first step to rebuilding the finances of clubs outside the SPL – but it could have been so much quicker and easier.

View Comment

scapaflow14Posted on12:03 am - May 8, 2013


The CE says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 23:52

Oh you wanted a serious answer! they were faced with two unpalatable choices, the status quo, or a breakaway SPL2. So they did a deal, its about what its always been about, self interest.

The detail will be very interesting, and its not a given that the SFL will go for it once they know precisely what the “it” is.

View Comment

scapaflow14Posted on12:04 am - May 8, 2013


“Walter on the Brink” apparantly

“The Daily Record ‏@Daily_Record 3m
Today’s back page. pic.twitter.com/KgRVeAkW3l

Retweeted by Allan Rennie “

View Comment

@antibedtaxfed (@antibedtaxfed)Posted on12:12 am - May 8, 2013


Walter on brink etc from DR

http://bit.ly/10F1PyX

View Comment

CastofThousandsPosted on12:27 am - May 8, 2013


scapaflow14 says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 22:26

Scapa, I recall some quetioning on CG’s departure at the time and thought a firm timetable for his severance had been mentioned. Perhaps better informed posters can fill in the detail of his RIFC exit once they’ve had their cornflakes in the morning.

Also recollect some discussion about his likely continuation on the board of TRFC (might have been HP’s well informed analysis). Again I’m a bit shaky on detail but post as a prompt to those with the facts to hand.

Think I might hing aroon for a wee while and see what the morning papers bring.

View Comment

The CEPosted on12:28 am - May 8, 2013


Scapa,

I’m sure you’ll forgive me a hint of indignation in my reaction to the hasty reconstruction proposals, given the senseless accusations cast by many(not including yourself) on SMFC and SG for a decision which is beginning to look more and more like the correct one.

View Comment

scapaflow14Posted on12:33 am - May 8, 2013


The CE says:
Wednesday, May 8, 2013 at 00:28

Pace, go forth and sin no more my son 😉

View Comment

scapaflow14Posted on12:36 am - May 8, 2013


mullach says:
Wednesday, May 8, 2013 at 00:27

Mt Green is due to go at the end of May, following an orderly handover, for a given value of handover.

View Comment

The CEPosted on12:39 am - May 8, 2013


scapaflow14 says:
Wednesday, May 8, 2013 at 00:03

I agree with you that much like a Budget, the devil will be in the detail. The Articles should make interesting reading, especially if they have been hastily thrown together by Donkey.

What should surely please everyone, including TRFC fans, and despite what the conspiracy theorists have told us, is that it appears to provide no opportunity for a leg-up to TRFC.

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on12:44 am - May 8, 2013


My wee brain is starting to hurt…getting confused with all this!

To support selling ST’s I thought we would see a period of ‘relative’ calm down iBrox way.
So I was wrong yet again.

It seems we now have a deliberate period of rumour, uncertainty and general confusion about what is really happening around the Boardroom.

Something significant has to happen now – and which will bring clarity to the debacle.
Otherwise they will be running out of time for next season wrt any licence queries and/or Sevco 2.0 ?

Got a feeling something major will be announced by COP Friday.
(To be clear – just speculation on my part and maybe just wishful thinking 😉 )

View Comment

scapaflow14Posted on12:46 am - May 8, 2013


Ralph Topping has climbed out of the hampden crypt or wherever they have had him stuffed WARNING, the cartoon attached to this piece on the homepage will have you in therapy for years

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/4918865/Ralph-Topping-Set-up-can-save-our-game.html

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on12:49 am - May 8, 2013


ecobhoy says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 23:36

2

0

Rate This

__________________________________________

Wow… just wow. Just realised: This is it. Was that board metting held in a warehouse somewhere? Because the full blown Mexican stand off has been reached.

Guns are out and pointed. No one trusts anyone.

We have the Mr. True blue Murray (M), with a reputation to uphold, holding the AIM gun, threatening to blow away the spivs payday, bringing the whole revenue stream down, and wiping the spivs out.

And then there’s Cardigan, playing the ‘nice guy Eddie’, role. He’s got the season ticket sales to shoot with. And he controls the bears with his cleanish hands and legend status. If he walks away, revenue stream is gone. No club. No spiv payday.

But he’s really only looking after his daddy’s interests SDM – or Daddy – organised the whole heist and is seriously displeased at the monumental fer cup that has ensued. But he has got Cambell bought and paid for with the EBTs and if he says the word, his pet monkey will pull the SFA licence. No SFA licence = No revenue stream for the spivs, and no beloved club for the Cardigan and Murray. The whole thing is dragging his brogues through the Mr.Brown stuff, and getting the filth dangerously close to his operations.

And then there’s Charles (Mr Green) &Ahmed (Mr Pink – or should that be Mr Brown Charles? ) &Stockridge (Mr Red/Black?… Depending on when the money runs out).
They own all the assets. They have the title deeds. You can’t play the game if you don’t have a ball to kick. And you can’t sell tickets if you don’t have a ball to play with. No spiv pay = No brogue play!

And then lying shot up and bleeding on the floor, we have Mr Whyte. He knows everything about everyone in that room. He wants paid, but more than anything he wants out.

Police are outside. The place is surrounded. Who will make the next move? ….

… And…… CUT!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjjVig_0HFw

View Comment

scapaflow14Posted on12:59 am - May 8, 2013


For what little it may be worth, the Rangers Supporters Trust is reporting a whisper that Mr hart is also considering his position. If true that makes it a potential clean sweep, wither rangers then?

View Comment

john clarkePosted on1:03 am - May 8, 2013


The CE says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 23:52
‘..IMO – the position they have now reached is sensible and is a good first step to rebuilding the finances of clubs outside the SPL – but it could have been so much quicker and easier.’
——
Agreed.

It has to be taken as read that If all the anomalies of the ‘revolving door’ between the dead club and the SFA hierarchy over the years ( how many suffering years!) had been faced up to by the SFA Board, SDM’s Rangers would have been brought to account long ago, in time to avoid the suicidal, lemming-type march over the precipice.

The real damage was done when, in a blatantly corrupt effort to save the lemmings, the SFA tried to remove the cliff so that the lemmings could be saved.

It has taken some considerable time, and the courage of not a few chairmen in the SFL, for Scottish Football to accept as a fact of life,that the revolving door has got to stop revolving.

Because Scottish Football does not , in fact, need the dead, rotten club which damned near killed it, as much as it needs a return to honesty and,yes, integrity.

The saving of what the dead club came to represent ( courtesy of SDM, CW, CG, et alii) has ceased to matter.

The ‘owners’ and directors of what claims to be the same old club are seen to be venal, rapacious, cynical and utterly unprincipled, as ready to metaphorically cut each others throats as they are to stiff the rest of us to make a quick killing.

Their new , illegitimate,creation which is currently tearing itself apart in a freakish side-show, can now be left, quietly, to destroy itself.

And the rest of Scottish Football is ready to say’ so be it’, and move on.

View Comment

scapaflow14Posted on1:08 am - May 8, 2013


http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/397865/Walter-Smith-set-to-quit-Ibrox-shambles

View Comment

vforvernacularPosted on1:19 am - May 8, 2013


Some good news on possible reconstruction I think, but there are still unfortunately several opportunities for these new proposals to be rejected or voted down. It would only take a few in the SFL or an even smaller number in the SPL to sink the whole thing – lets watch this space but please don’t hold yer breath folks.

In case I’m not making myself clear on that topic – let me say I’m pretty happy with these proposals, at this point. The devils is very much in the detail but at least some important steps can be taken here.

Also today there has been lots of interesting debate on the possible goings on in the boardroom, the HMRC strategy for the ongoing Tax Case and of course the ubiquitous spivery in all its world of possibility. Some good stuff there including a very welcome return for RTC.

In this area I can only read in awe. So grateful to all contributers because this is a fascinating and compelling story of spivery.

There have been a few minor lows today as well IMO. If I can be so bold I really think some people can be more tolerant of Night Terror for example, I see so many thumbs down and then read his posts wondering whether people actually read posts on this site or simple give thumbs up or down based on popularity of who is posting rather than what is posted.

NT is not shy to express an opinion or question a poorly formed one when she/he sees it. Hopefully she/he doesn’t mind me saying so but its clear she/he is not interesting in any sort of silly popularity contest but in an aggressively accurate debate of the topics of the day etc. (and our opinions of such).

You might think that direct debate would be welcomed here of all blogs whether people agree with a particular opinion or not. personally I know I wouldn’t bother reading this blog at all if we lost the open forum for honest and direct exchange of opinion and keen debate.

In a similar vain I’ve noticed in the last few days that glen2012 will get thumbs down from some people almost no matter what he expresses.

Lets see the opinion and the debate, not silly popularity contests without reading or considering what is written. We are better than that surely.

On the Phil Mac Goilla Bhain “debate” again it seems like tolerance is thin here. (not to mention I can’t help feeling we are talking about the man while he is “in the room”). I think personally think he is a good journalist, he seeks the truth no matter how uncomfortable and follows his instincts when he feels he has to. Whether or not he really has to titilate and tease the timternet (thanks RTC) with some of his tweets etc is really not that important to me – I understand but disagree with NTs point on this – but I feel no need to vehemtly disagree with what was an expression of personal preference. Some people will be happy with the “sweetie wife” stuff, others won’t. Personally I find it easy to let that pass me by because I’m quite convinced Phil has good sources, and breaks good stories, without fear, regardless of what he chooses to tweet to us all in the meantime.

CE – I note some comment from you on the restructure debate, voting etc and I have to say the uber defensive tone is becoming a bit tiresome. Not everyone believed there was some wider conspiracy that SG and RM were part of. That doesn’t mean we are not entitled to question why they did what they did and the way they did it.

Apologies if this isn’t the most coherent but I waiting until my second bottle of vino before posting tonight (so much to read).

I’ll also apologise in advance for the “chiding” words, I mean well.

Sleep well folks.

View Comment

redlichtiePosted on1:21 am - May 8, 2013


So this merger thing between the SPL & SFL….

What happens when Craigy-boy pops up tomorrow to reveal that the SFL are in fact owned by Sevco 5088? 🙂

Scottish football needs a strong Arbroath.

View Comment

bogsdolloxPosted on1:24 am - May 8, 2013


chipm0nk says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 20:23

Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 19:40

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

I do not believe they will go after the former players. In my opinion, and I claim no special knowledge in this, if anything they will go for the former owner and possibly directors.

As far as I am aware the players had letters of comfort (or whatever) that if there was any tax liability then the employer would deal with it.

The employer no longer exists i any real way, so the only option would be to go after the people who put those arrangements in place. In particular anyone who had benefited from the arrangement.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The employer for some large loans still exists i.e MIM Group, albeit in a lesser form than previously.

View Comment

callumssonPosted on1:25 am - May 8, 2013


Just realised that the SPL Chairmen have only agreed these changes “in principle” so far and that the formal vote is still to come…plenty of time for Stewart Gilmour to change his mind… again. 😉

View Comment

BayviewGoldPosted on1:40 am - May 8, 2013


vforvernacular says:
Wednesday, May 8, 2013 at 01:19

Good post and some welcome words on the reception of some of the commentators on here. Sometimes I am also left scratching my head at the number of TDs that some well formed or relevant comments get, and it does seem to be a case of simply who it is or even worse shooting the messenger. The main reason I like this forum is by its definition it is open to everyone from all walks of Scottish football, and the debate it times helps illuminate that which would remain hidden. I didn’t get a lot of the flak NT got today and the conspiracy theory that was raised over the league reconstruction being announced today to hide bad news down govan was tinfoil hat stuff. Power to the internet bampots of all colours. (and yes the timternet ones too 🙂 )

View Comment

BayviewGoldPosted on1:47 am - May 8, 2013


redlichtie says:
Wednesday, May 8, 2013 at 01:21

Scottish football needs a strong Arbroath.

One of my favourite tag lines on this blog, reminds me of the “we are all Spartacus” moment 🙂

so in that light :

Scottish football needs a strong East Fife with apologies to Red lichtie

View Comment

bogsdolloxPosted on1:47 am - May 8, 2013


callumsson says:
Wednesday, May 8, 2013 at 01:25

Just realised that the SPL Chairmen have only agreed these changes “in principle” so far and that the formal vote is still to come…plenty of time for Stewart Gilmour to change his mind… again. 😉

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Perhaps he might consider using his “veto” to encourage the others to abolish the 11-1 voting system?

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on1:59 am - May 8, 2013


vforvernacular says:
Wednesday, May 8, 2013 at 01:19

__________________________________

Personally I find it easy to let that pass me by because I’m quite convinced Phil has good sources, and breaks good stories, without fear, regardless of what he chooses to tweet to us all in the meantime.

___________________________________

Have to say I agree with you there.
PMG is definitely a ‘proper’ journalist.
Looking at this as a Scientist: Objectivity is impossible because of cognitive biases. Everyone in the world is subjective (except for me of course, although some less informed people even now persist in their disagreement with me on this!).
Phil is open about his agenda and beliefs, which equip a hypothetically objective observer (none exist) to apply qualification to his statements unencumbered. Generally, he produces reliable, verifiable information with a good strike rate. He clearly understands the difference between verifiable fact and interpreted opinion and differentiates effectively between these. There may be some selection bias unintentional or otherwise – but this is only a major issue if he was your only source of information, or other sources suffered from the same polarisations. In Phil’s case, this clearly doesn’t apply for the most part! The opposite if anything.
There are lots of fascinating articles on ‘the hierarchy of evidence’ I could bore you with. But in my view, Phil is definitely worthy of qualified journalistic credence. But you should never single source anything!

View Comment

CastofThousandsPosted on2:14 am - May 8, 2013


Killing time.

Someone mentioned the need for a glossary of abbreviations a while back. I started jotting some down and got carried away with myself in the process. Unfortunately the list is not comprehensive.

The cast :

Sir David Murray : SDM, Minty.
Craig White : CW, TGEF (The google eyed freak), MBB (Motherwell born bankrupt).
Walter Smith : WS, Watty, Sir Cardigan, The cardigan.
Ally McCoist : AMcC, Fat Sally, Sally.
Charles Green : CG, Charles, Charlie, Big Hands, Yorkie (Yorkshire born Businessman).
RTC : Rangers Tax Case (The blogger who started this thing off about two years ago and who ran a blog for over a year that gave birth to TSFM)
HMRC : Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, Hector (portrayed pictorially as a wee moustacheod man in a bowler hat).
Sevco : The reincarnation of Rangers Football Club, THE Rangers Football Club (TRFC). See also RFC(IA) (RFC in administration), RFC(IL) (RFC in liquidation).
Sevco 5088 : Don’t ask, it gets really complicated if you do.
RIFC : Rangers International Football Club (a laundrette where spivs wash their money).
SPL, SFA, SFL : The ‘governing’ bodies of Scottish Football.
Spivs : Assorted businessmen not in possession of a valid business plan.
Bears : Unfortunate supporters of RFC/Sevco.
LNS : Lord Nimmo Smith (Chaired enquiry into RFC EBT Scheme).
BFDJ : Big Fat Derek Johnstone.
SMSM/MSM : (Scottish) Main stream media (A mythical source of fantastic dreams).
Duff and Phelps : D&P, Duff and Duffer (copyright pending), D&D ( a troop of conjurers with particular skill in the use of smoke and mirrors, occasionally act as administrators for bankrupt companies).
Establishment : National organisation dedicated to corrupting justice for the good of the public.

The props :

EBT : Employee Benefit Trust (A novel and somewhat precarious method of ‘tax free’ remuneration).
CVA : Company Voluntary Arrangement (method of drawing a bankrupt entity back to life).
MVL : Members Voluntary Liquidation (a parachute for the use of spivs).
ST : Season tickets (a method the spivs use to get more money from the Bears).
AIM : Alternative Investment Market (a casino where spivs gamble other people’s money).

The scenery :

NED : Non Executive Director : Titular position bestowed on ‘Rangers’ men to provide spiv organisation with some credibility (Also a legally defined member of a board of directors).
CEO : A chair at the head of the boardroom table with a revolving door behind it.
FSA : Financial Services Authority (a fabled organisation that looks after us all, like the tooth fairy except less relevant).
Tycoon : An individual with no visible means of financial support.
FTT : First Tier Tax Tribunal (HMRC’s attempt to repel spivs)
UTT : Upper Tier Tribunal (Spivs attempt to repel HMRC).
CL : Champions League
FF, RM : Follow Follow, Rangers Media (Well informed and balanced RFC media outlets where you can correspond in a measured and considered manner).

Incidentals :

IIRC : If I recall correctly.
FWIW : For what its worth.
FFS : Expletive used to indicate an obvious point has been overlooked.
Armageddon : A place where football supporters enjoy exciting sport.
Fiasco : See ‘Sevco’.
Shenanigans : An earnest and well intended effort to do what is best for Scottish football fans.
GIRUY : A light hearted jest aimed at an opposing fan.
WATP : An insidious remark alluding to a long felt and ill founded superiority complex.
OT : Off topic.

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on3:21 am - May 8, 2013


OT

Alex for the off…Shirley some mistake?
=================================

“…MANCHESTER UNITED were last night engulfed in a frenzy of speculation about Alex Ferguson’s future.

Bookies slashed the odds on the manager’s 27-year reign coming to an end to an astonishing 7-4 ON.

And Everton boss David Moyes was rapidly installed as favourite to succeed Fergie, becoming 11-10 ON to take over the Old Trafford hotseat…”

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/4918721/Alex-Ferguson-in-quit-frenzy-as-bookies-cut-odds-on-Man-Utd-exit.html

View Comment

redlichtiePosted on4:31 am - May 8, 2013


bayviewgold says:
Wednesday, May 8, 2013 at 01:47

redlichtie says:
Wednesday, May 8, 2013 at 01:21

Scottish football needs a strong Arbroath.

One of my favourite tag lines on this blog, reminds me of the “we are all Spartacus” moment 🙂

so in that light :

Scottish football needs a strong East Fife with apologies to Red lichtie
————————————————————————————

Oi! 🙂

February 2 1974 Rangers 2-3 Arbroath
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOkkA4g7yP4

…and bloody Parlane dived!

Perhaps we’ll get them this coming season.

View Comment

selfassessorPosted on6:51 am - May 8, 2013


Some speculation Ferguson has decided to take on the new, bigger and recently reported Football Director role at T’ Tribute Act. 🙂

View Comment

helpmaboabPosted on6:51 am - May 8, 2013


Mullach @02.14
I asked for a the glossary of terms. Any more for any more? Well done that man!

View Comment

neepheidPosted on7:40 am - May 8, 2013


StevieBC says:
Wednesday, May 8, 2013 at 03:21
0 0 Rate This
OT

Alex for the off…Shirley some mistake?
=================================

“…MANCHESTER UNITED were last night engulfed in a frenzy of speculation about Alex Ferguson’s future.

Bookies slashed the odds on the manager’s 27-year reign coming to an end to an astonishing 7-4 ON.
++++++++++++++
This news is surely connected with events at Ibrox over the weekend. Now that Sir Walter is likely to walk away, I can’t see Ally staying on.

Now clearly Sir Alex has only soldiered on for so long due to the lack of a young talented manager of proven ability available to succeed him. Now that problem is finally resolved. Ally is certain to be available (they can’t afford him anyway), and then the very day after that news breaks Sir Alex moves to stand down.

Ally’s difficulty has always been that he is currently the manager of the world’s second largest club, so he could only progress his career by moving to the only club that is larger. That club, and we have this on the authority of Charles Green himself, is Man Utd.

These events coming together like this simply cannot be a coincidence. The crown prince waits in the wings, Man Utd prepare to enter a new era of world domination with the young maestro at the helm, the Spanish and German clubs can only look on with a mixture of fear and envy.

David Moyes? That’s a joke, surely, or maybe the bookies trying to draw attention away from the real favourite. I’m off to the bookies now before anyone else catches on.

View Comment

torrejohnbhoyPosted on8:04 am - May 8, 2013


http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2013/05/08/how-section-216-of-the-insolvency-act-could-prevent-the-return-of-dave-king-to-rangers/

View Comment

therampantbaronPosted on8:35 am - May 8, 2013


StevieBC says:
Wednesday, May 8, 2013 at 03:21
——————————————–
I am surprised Ally’s name hasn’t been mentioned in connection with this

View Comment

mrlucapacioliPosted on9:01 am - May 8, 2013


A single and rather aggressive man, let’s call him Mr M, had lied and cheated the system and authorities and had won custody of a baby, Baby R. The baby got really sick and he gave the baby to a pretty disreputable associate, Mr W, to look after it in its sick state. Mr M was too busy fighting with other businessmen to keep his business empire from crumbling. The origin of this baby’s sickness was really rather sad, it had been fed on sweets without any natural nutrition. Artificial ingredients were keeping this baby alive and he just gave it more sweets. The baby was hyper when he gave it to Mr W. It was ravenous, malnourished, full of sugary badness and it was utterly wild. Instead of going to a doctor Mr W took the baby’s birth certificate down to the DSS with some false documents and got the child benefits transferred to his account, what a rogue. Then poor Baby R died.

But the scurrilous Mr W wanted to continue to claim the child benefit. He realised that this was a source of income for a long time to come so he went to the far east to some people that operated in a very secretive world and would you believe it, he was able to buy a baby! He dressed the baby just like the old one and he decided he would try and tell people it was the same baby!

Immigration was a nightmare but Mr W was resourceful. He gave a large global agency an awful lot of money to handle this for him and with all their contacts and ability to bully the national authorities he got enough paperwork to let the baby into the country. However the national authorities were unhappy and although they had failed to do their job and allowed this crime to take place they did manage to get the baby taken away from Mr W, the rogue.

Mr W wasn’t happy. He went back to the agency he’d given so much money and they came up with a plan to have someone put forward to take the baby who would secretly be the surrogate for Mr W and Mr W would pay him a slice of the child benefit. They came up with someone and we’ll call him, say, Mr G.

Mr G played the part well. He disowned Mr W, he showed off the baby, and although it didn’t even look all that like the baby that had died he was so outlandish and gregarious that even the aunts and uncles began to accept that it was the same baby and bought it clothes and gifts. Indeed Mr G got so fond of the attention and his own status as the baby’s guardian that he began to believe it just a wee bit himself and began to wonder if he could get rid of Mr W altogether. After all Mr W wasn’t even the original baby’s rightful parent. Mr G decided he’d go and change the payment details for the child benefit. It was, after all, expensive looking after this baby. Now that everyone had accepted him as the legal guardian what could Mr W do about that, he had been banned!

Mr W was not happy. He might have been banned but he knew Mr G had agreed to everything and he could prove it.

Mr G called his bluff.

The baby cried.

Mr W could prove the arrangement.

The baby pooped its nappy.

Mr G cried.

All Mr W wanted was the child benefit, but without the benefit Mr G couldn’t pay for the baby’s upkeep.

So Mr G had no choice, he walked away from the baby in exchange for some of the benefit during the time he’d looked after it.

Mr W was then in a pickle. The foster family the baby was placed with were relatives of Mr M (remember him?) and he was only supposed to be looking after it.

Mr W decided that what he could do was have the aunties and uncles look after the baby. He knew they didn’t want the baby sent away so they would agree to look after it in exchange for him still claiming the benefit. They were angry, but what choice did they have? If they reported their suspicion then surely the authorities would go back to the agency and question their paperwork? If this wasn’t the real baby then it wouldn’t even be allowed to stay! But if all that happened then the authorities would also be exposed as letting the original crime happen.

Oh my.

So the corrupt authorities decided to wash their hands of it and to let the family and Mr W try and come to an agreement. They didn’t even care that the baby was very sick again and was back on a diet of sweets.

To find out what happens next, if any of the criminals come clean, the fate of the baby, Mr W and Mr G’s comeuppance , whether the coroner would ever report on the identity of the unknown baby in the morgue, and the return of Mr M you need to tune in again in 9 months for next edition of……

“Zombie baby fraud!”

It’s all in there. The only thing we do know is that no one, but no one, has grieved for poor Baby R and that’s the biggest crime of all.

View Comment

Comments are closed.