The Case for a New SFA.

Avatar ByBig Pink

The Case for a New SFA.

After making inquiries into progress on Resolution 12 to the Celtic AGM of 2013 there is little doubt in my mind that the SFA made a serious error in the process of UEFA licensing.

Here are some facts:

 

  1. UEFA does not issue licences to clubs who have due tax bills outstanding,
  2. UEFA require the SFA to satisfy themselves of a club’s eligibility for a licence and that clubs have provided proof no overdue tax payable exists,
  3. UEFA also require a club to tell the SFA and UEFA if, after the issue of a licence there are material changes in their circumstances which would affect their eligibility – including the situation at #1 above,
  4. UEFA awarded Rangers a licence to play in European competition in March 2011,
  5. In May 2011 Rangers received a tax bill, which they did not contest or appeal or agree a payment plan. The bill (which remains unpaid) was overdue by 30 June 2011,
  6. UEFA received no notice of this,
  7. Rangers did not lose their licence and in fact competed in both the Champions’ League and The Europa League in that season.

 

None of these facts are disputed (as far as is known) by anyone connected to the saga. What is in doubt, because the SFA won’t answer the question, is whether they received a copy of the tax bill and the May letter that accompanied it from Rangers or not.

If they did send it to the SFA, Rangers could reasonably argue that they did their bit and the SFA fell down on the job by failing to notify UEFA of their new unfavourable tax status.

If Rangers did not send it, then they had broken not only UEFA FFP rules but more importantly the trust amongst SFA members that full disclosure is honestly made in a self-certification process. The SFA in not carrying out their monitoring responsibilities properly and using the powers UEFA FFP gave them also broke that trust.

In either case, there is a systematic failure by the SFA to administer the sport effectively; either through a failure of trust, a failure of administration – or both.

Even worse, in the four years that have elapsed since this incident, it seems that nothing has been done to put matters right. The SFA have been very active in refusing to answer questions on the matter, particularly this one;

“How will you prevent it happening again?”

 Incredibly, up to now, no measures have been put in place to add rigour to the licensing process. Are they really saying that they think the process was carried out satisfactorily?

No they are saying nothing. Silence and denial, followed by silence and inaction.

So what is the point of this article? Let’s call out the elephant in the room right away – it is unequivocally not to have a go at Rangers. This is no longer really about Rangers at all, but about the SFA’s mal-governance of the game. Besides, clubs affected by this seeming failure on the part of the authorities (in that year Celtic, Dundee United and Hearts and Kilmarnock) are hardly likely to successfully sue a club now in liquidation (although small shareholders might take a different view with regard to the SFA’s conduct).

Nor am I seeking to find some retrospective punishment for the club (as far as I know sanctions are neither available retrospectively, nor useful in this case ) but to be aware that the question above urgently needs to be addressed if the status of football as a sport is to be maintained.

To the extent that this is about what has happened to Rangers, does anyone – no matter what club they owe their allegiance to – seriously consider that TRFC would NOT be in a better situation today had the SFA acted with propriety and applied their rules correctly in 2011/12?

With the kind of money on offer these days for entry into Europe, and the interdependent nature of the game, it seems fairly self-evident that trust is not enough to allow effective regulation, and that incompetent governance where money is the paramount consideration is unacceptable.

The SFA has long enjoyed a misconceived impression of its function as being that of a quasi-legal body, bestowing upon it a status of independence and aloofness from the partisan interest of the clubs. In the main, fans have largely bought into that myth. However the SFA is nothing of the kind.

It is in fact merely a cartel which is allowed to govern itself for its own benefit and is only accountable to the clubs that make up its membership, and not the fans. Check out the last sentences of almost any rule, where discretionary powers awarded to itself effectively render the rule worthless and unenforceable.

Literally, a nihilistic approach to governance

Maybe it is time the SFA scrapped the get out of jail discretionary clauses, and put some robust regulation in place to ensure the financial transparency of all clubs?

Even better, politicians are never slow to tell us of the importance of football to the social fabric of the country – in that case why not follow their own rhetoric, recognise that it cannot be allowed to self regulate in narrow self interest, and legislate to have football governed independently?

If I was a Rangers fan, I’d be thinking that the SFA’s failure to police the UEFA licencing issue helped accelerate the club’s demise – by making it easier to paper over the cracks.

If I was a Celtic, Hearts, Dundee United or Killie fan, well the consequences for them in terms of lost financial and competitive opportunities are fairly obvious.

Conclusion? The clubs can no longer be trusted to run the affairs of the industry themselves.

A new independent, accountable regulatory body (funded by the clubs) is the minimum we need to save the game in this country. It should comprise representatives of the clubs, the fans and other stakeholders – and it should have a holistic remit as its prime directive, whilst ensuring fair and equitable treatment of all clubs.

It can take decisions on the basis of what is good for the game without the baggage of self-interest, and without any west of Scotland institutionalised bias. Of course Scotland isn’t alone in this. Football is a powerful political force across the world, and as developments at FIFA over the past couple of years have demonstrated, it is institutionally corrupt. The clubs can no longer be allowed to run it as they see fit, and we need to begin a campaign which will ultimately convince the pay-at-the-gate fan of the truth of that.

The UEFA licensing issue is only a pebble in the sand of football incompetence and corruption, but it is a microcosm of what ails the game. The good of the sport, and not individual clubs, is paramount. The SFA cannot and will not deliver that.

The case for a new regulatory body is clear, and the status quo is not an option unless the death of the sport is deemed acceptable.

There is little doubt in my mind that unless regime change is effected, in a few decades there will be no regime .

About the author

Avatar

Big Pink administrator

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

1,255 Comments so far

Avatar

Cluster OnePosted on3:56 pm - Oct 18, 2015


Overheard in the local Ladbrokes(SPFL sponsors)
Over £20 they got from Ticketus, what did they do with that money.
two guys talking about the court case.

Now after all this time where do you start with that one

View Comment

Avatar

Cluster OnePosted on4:02 pm - Oct 18, 2015


OOPS £2O MILL

View Comment

woodstein

woodsteinPosted on4:18 pm - Oct 18, 2015


testing

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on4:47 pm - Oct 18, 2015


Serious server downtime folks. BP is on the case with some other geeky types. Latest is that it may be a couple of days before we get back.

View Comment

woodstein

woodsteinPosted on5:10 pm - Oct 18, 2015


Third test

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on8:20 pm - Oct 18, 2015


Cluster One says: Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 15:56

Overheard in the local Ladbrokes(SPFL sponsors)
Over £20 they got from Ticketus, what did they do with that money.
two guys talking about the court case.

Now after all this time where do you start with that one
===================================
The charge sheet itself stated that RFC PLC provided a £16M loan to Wavetower which was used to pay off the bulk the RFC loan from LBG.

Note that the MSM appear to have permission to reveal the contents of the 20 page charge sheet, but not to reveal any court proceedings that followed about those charges.

After Friday’s hearing, I am unsure about what can actually be said about “Imran Ahmad”. The Scotsman and other sources stated on Friday “However, for reasons which cannot be disclosed, Crown Office lawyers have temporarily stopped proceedings against Mr Ahmad, an ex-club director.”

If proceedings have been stopped against him, then is it not reasonable to be able to discuss matters involving him which don’t impact on the other accused, at least until such time as proceedings are restarted?

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on8:27 pm - Oct 18, 2015


TSFM says:
Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 16:47
4 4 Rate This
Serious server downtime folks. BP is on the case with some other geeky types. Latest is that it may be a couple of days before we get back.
——————————————————————–

Is this just a faulty server issue or have hostile forces been at work?

Too early to say uTh
BP

View Comment

tykebhoy

tykebhoyPosted on8:35 pm - Oct 18, 2015


@easyjambo you mean we can talk aboot a bank account belonging to a maternal relation of someone. Oops no even that’s oot ;). Is there anything that can be said about Imran that is on topic for SFM that doesn’t have some connection to one or more of the other accused

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkPosted on8:54 pm - Oct 18, 2015


easyJambo says:
Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 20:20
_____
eJ,,I acknowledge your correction about the ‘wiglessness’ of the Advocate Depute, thank you,

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on9:04 pm - Oct 18, 2015


tykebhoy says: Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 20:35

I would personally see IA as currently being in a similar situation to Brian Stockbridge in that the police want to speak to him and there would be possibility of him being detained/charged with various offences.

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on9:11 pm - Oct 18, 2015


john clark says: Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 20:54
======================
Did you manage to work out who was representing who at Friday’s hearing?

I’ve been searching for QCs and Advocates with the names mentioned in court and I think I’ve identified most of them, with a little help from James Doleman’s withdrawn report. Unfortunately there isn’t a PM facility on the temporary site to take the matter offline.

View Comment

corrupt official

corrupt officialPosted on9:20 pm - Oct 18, 2015


EasyJambo.
Apologies, as I think I may have credited your twin brother Ally, as being a court attendee. (insert wee apologetic face)
WRT to Imran, Could it be as he never held a directorship of the thingy, that owned the thingy?, I imagine in his role as a real bona fide “nothing” (A part he played so well) he wasn’t required to sign a lot. Merely replying to the odd text and calling people to give them their jotters.

View Comment

jean7brodie

jean7brodiePosted on9:31 pm - Oct 18, 2015


I am suffering withdrawal symptoms. Nurse!!!!!

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on9:32 pm - Oct 18, 2015


IA was a director of TRFC Ltd “The Club” from 14 June 2012 until 29th May 2013

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on9:35 pm - Oct 18, 2015


corrupt official says: Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 21:20

EasyJambo.
Apologies, as I think I may have credited your twin brother Ally, as being a court attendee. (insert wee apologetic face)
========================
If I’m not mistaken AJ resides in middle England, and only ventures north for the odd Hearts game.

View Comment

corrupt official

corrupt officialPosted on9:42 pm - Oct 18, 2015


That’s right EJ. but not the clique that owned the club….I recall a certain conversation where he didn’t want/refused a directorship, and was thinking there may have been a reason for it. .

View Comment

The Cat NR1

The Cat NR1Posted on9:50 pm - Oct 18, 2015


joe mccormack says:
Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 10:49

2

0

Rate This

The dogs in the street are barking the news that King borrowed money from the 3 Bears (Taylor) in order to secure his shareholding.

Is this not newsworthy as it would open up for debate the whole issue of King’s investment strategy?

Why oh why is there not a single journo out there questioning King’s promises?

Surely Level 5 ‘ s powers don’t extend to silencing the entire Scottish media, though that would appear to be the case.

There are no secrets in Scottish football, our journos know where all the bodies are ⚰⚰.

Why the wall of silence, a Mafia boss would delight in this vow of Omerta.
===============================================
Would that bring the possibility of a concert party into play?
If so, would they have had to have made an offer for all the remaining shares when the company was still listed due to exceeding the 30% threshold?
I’m sure that MA (and others) will be keeping a close eye on the situation, and if there’s any potential financial loss that his legal eagles will be ready to act.

View Comment

Avatar

coopermanPosted on10:00 pm - Oct 18, 2015


It is interesting with regards IA and whether or not he should be tried in absentia. Bearing in mind that under Article 6 of the ECHR everyone is entitled to a “fair trial” the question is whether or not that can be achieved if he is not actually there to instruct his defence team.

In addition, it is important for the Court to show that the person has actually been served with a summons. Otherwise how can it decide whether that person simply chose not to appear. I’m afraid things appearing in the Daily Record are unlikely to convince a Judge.

“The Council of Europe has made commentary on judgments that are made in absentia. The Committee of Ministers, in Resolution (75) 11, of 21 May 1975, stated that an individual must first be effectively served with a summons prior to being tried. In this sense, the ministers are emphasizing that it is not the presence of the accused at the hearing that is of importance, rather the focus should be on whether or not the individual was informed of the trial in time.”

In my opinion that Court has taken an entirely pragmatic view in simply setting action against IA just now. There are too many practical problems with regard both his case and those of others.

View Comment

The Cat NR1

The Cat NR1Posted on10:01 pm - Oct 18, 2015


Is Alan Muir responsible for the downtime?
Under normal circumstances we’d be in full honest mistake discussion mode for a couple of days after a performance like Saturday’s.

Sportscene should have plenty to discuss tonight, with both new top flight managers having lost their first match in charge, a change at the top of the Premiership and WGS staying on as national team boss. Or will it be more honest mistakes analysis and a 10-in-a-row love in instead?

View Comment

The Cat NR1

The Cat NR1Posted on10:12 pm - Oct 18, 2015


easyJambo says:
Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 21:04

1

0

Rate This

tykebhoy says: Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 20:35

I would personally see IA as currently being in a similar situation to Brian Stockbridge in that the police want to speak to him and there would be possibility of him being detained/charged with various offences.
============================================
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/10022883/Imran-Ahmad-leaves-Rangers-under-a-cloud.html
The transaction mentioned in this article may be relevant re the IA situation. I won’t reproduce the text or add anything to what can already be found in the public domain.

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkPosted on10:37 pm - Oct 18, 2015


easyJambo says:
Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 21:11
‘…Did you manage to work out who was representing who at Friday’s hearing?’
__________
I
Not entirely for sure, except in three cases, I think- Green, Whyte, and Whitehouse. And by a process of elimination, maybe two others!
I caught the names of only 5 of the QCs who spoke, and now can’t tell for sure which of them was sitting where!

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on10:41 pm - Oct 18, 2015


john clark says: Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 22:37
————————————
I’ll PM you when full functionality is restored.

View Comment

Avatar

joe mccormackPosted on10:43 pm - Oct 18, 2015


How is Level 5 managing to keep any questioning of King’s investment strategy out of the media?

Not one of them is on his case which I’m sure is baffling to most of us.

The media appear to have taken a vow of silence on all things Mr King and certainly in regards to his promised investment………I don’t get it, what’s in it for them?

If King has indeed borrowed money from the 3 Bears, Taylor, in order to finance his share purchase, this is a huge story surely. The man that promised tens of millions of investment has no money……now how does that stack up with his previous promises?

Perhaps when King next jets in one of our intrepid journos could pop the question………..though I seriously doubt it given their apparent lack of enthusiasm to tackle the subject.

Given the collapse in the number of printed papers being sold one would think that the editors would be on the case of their well renumerated staff to bring in a story that would bump up the numbers.

Given the recent rumours as to the financial situation down Govan way just what is preventing our media stirring the pot?

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkPosted on10:45 pm - Oct 18, 2015


easyJambo says:
Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 21:04
‘…I would personally see IA as currently being in a similar situation to Brian Stockbridge in that the police want to speak to him and there would be possibility of him being detained/charged with various offences.’
_______
I think that’s a safe deduction from one interpretation of the phrase’ temporarily stopped proceedings’.

View Comment

Avatar

Barcabhoy (@Barcabhoy1)Posted on3:30 am - Oct 19, 2015


Not sure how anyone outside of King or Taylor , and their respective advisers, would know whether Taylor lent money to King to invest and/or lend to Rangers .

I would imagine neither party would want this publicised. King because it would out him as not having the funds he claimed he would invest, and Taylor , because it would expose him to a potential concert party investigation. You can rule out advisers being loose with their tongue.

I’m not saying it 100% isn’t accurate , but it does strike me as one of these stories that is accepted as fact , without any proof. The more important point is that the risk environment has worsened markedly since King bought his shares and since the last loans were made.

King working in concert with the 3 Bears may be an issue in future, however for now the issue is whether they are prepared to lend money to Rangers with the probability it will be completely lost whilst weakening their position moving forward

View Comment

Avatar

fisianiPosted on4:44 am - Oct 19, 2015


The Bosman ruling came down to restraint of trade and freedom of movement. Surely there must be similar restraint of trade rules that unfairly restrict clubs to a league and players to a club. The best wayto share in the wealth of the EPL would be to be a part of it. We would probably only get there via the court

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on7:11 am - Oct 19, 2015


joe mccormack says:
Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 22:43
6 0 Rate This
How is Level 5 managing to keep any questioning of King’s investment strategy out of the media?
========================================

My personal take is Level 5 are getting that part for free. Things are rolling along very nicely on the park and there is no willingness to discuss negative topics.surrounding Rangers. The court case brings other possibilities but they will be more than happy to accept the reporting restriction in my view. Getting Rangers to the top league minus any distractions is all the media care about.

The Celtic AGM is in November. Let’s not lose sight of the fact Celtic have called an AGM, having previously submitted fully audited accounts. The media will attend the AGM then for the next couple of days focus on the most negative aspects they can. History proves that to be the case. For me it clearly brings into focus the double standards they operate under. I guarantee if we are sitting in January 2016 and there has been no audited accounts or AGM from Rangers the media will STILL turn a blind eye. Neither will they ask the SFA if it affects their licence to operate (don’t laugh!).

View Comment

StevieBCStevieBC

StevieBCStevieBCPosted on7:54 am - Oct 19, 2015


Whilst awaiting developments…and for the office geeks to top up the ‘leccy dongle’… 😉

For those of us who contacted the Scottish Football Hall of Fame about considering the inclusion of Turnbull Hutton for standing up for / saving [?] Scottish Football…amongst his many contributions to Scottish football and Raith Rovers in particular.

A Scott Mullen Herald article today states that 5 new inductees had been unveiled:
Ally MacLeod
Bobby Brown ‘Rangers legend’
Maurice Malpas
George Graham [late of Arsenal]
Prof.Hillis, national team doctor.
===============================
I presume that the nomination process takes a while and Turnbull’s selection will be reviewed in due course. Ally MacLeod passed away in 2004, and IMO he fully deserves his inclusion for somehow giving the whole of Scotland the self-belief that we were going to win the World Cup – or “come back with a medal at least” !
Brown & Malpas are included as gifted ex-players.
But Graham & Hillis ?

George Graham was punted from Arsenal for receiving an illegal 425K backhander from a football agent and was banned from the game for a year. He was a decent manager, and apparently was a decent player in his day.
But compare this inclusion to Pete Rose – a baseball legend who was banned from baseball, and their hall of fame for life for betting on baseball.

And the national team doctor inducted into the Scottish Hall of Fame ?
I’m sure he has been a great addition to the Scottish backroom team, for doing his job,
What will they have in a display case in the Museum ? His stethoscope ?!
Will the kit man eventually get inducted…?

Just a gentle gripe for a Monday morning.

Have a good day. 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

joe mccormackPosted on8:10 am - Oct 19, 2015


Up the hoops

In my experience nothing is for free, there is a price to pay for everything whether monetary or in kind.

Fully agree with your comments on the AGM/accounts.

Driven by the continuing failure of our officials to get even basic decisions correct, Muir, again, then the ref in the St J’s game, why does the SFA not publish the marks given by the ref supervisor in the stand after each game, giving some transparency to the process.

That from a Joe public viewpoint would help our understanding of how the marking system works and why those with the best marks get the biggest matches.

Though, in Muir ‘ s case, it would be no surprise if he was marked 10 out of 10, a perfect performance, perhaps even a wee gold star added for good measure!

View Comment

Avatar

JimboPosted on8:18 am - Oct 19, 2015


Good luck with that post Joe.

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on8:30 am - Oct 19, 2015


fisiani says:
Monday, October 19, 2015 at 04:44
2 4 Rate This
The Bosman ruling came down to restraint of trade and freedom of movement. Surely there must be similar restraint of trade rules that unfairly restrict clubs to a league and players to a club. The best wayto share in the wealth of the EPL would be to be a part of it. We would probably only get there via the court

I think you are right, to an extent, but nobody can just join a pyramid at the top, without being invited to do so. Would Celtic/Aberdeen/Anyone really want to give up any possibility of European football for perhaps up to a decade? Maybe, but probably not.

View Comment

StevieBCStevieBC

StevieBCStevieBCPosted on9:03 am - Oct 19, 2015


“In moderation” : is ‘backhander’ a banned word ?

View Comment

Avatar

fisianiPosted on9:40 am - Oct 19, 2015


Anyone really want to give up any possibility of European football for perhaps up to a decade? Every team in Europe knows the name Celtic at least. Which of these teams would seriously turn down a one off or two legged friendly Barcelona, Inter Milan, Porto, Ajax, esp if not or no longer in European competition. Celtic could have more European competition than we have at present. We could play Hartlepool on a Saturday and LA Galaxy midweek.
Do they just sit back and accept sliding into mediocrity and remain a feeder club for the EPL or do they demand their place in the sun. Remember that Celtic are not just a Scottish club but they pay UK income tax. There are clever ways to enter English football. https://www.soccerassociation.com/0/
Buy a small English team rename them Celtic and base them at Celtic Park. Clubs can legally change their names and change their ground. How much would it cost to buy a Crawley Town, a Guiseley, a Barrow etc. Or do we just quietly accept sitting at the back of the bus. Hostile takeovers are not illegal. Think outside the current situation. Define the goal then come up with the strategy. Or just do nothing.

Already been tried – by Celtic – who abandoned the plan at the last minute on the advice of Brian Quinn because the directors were in fear of possible action by the shareholders of the other club. Opration strawberry I believe it was entitled.
It was also tried by Clydebank, and that resulted in a hurried meeting being convened at the 1996 World Cup to legislate away any possibility that it could happen.
And it won’t.
BP

View Comment

Avatar

joe mccormackPosted on11:00 am - Oct 19, 2015


Without venturing into OC/NC territory let’s just assume new club is old club.

That seems to be the SFA take on things, for what it’s worth!

So on the assumption, court cases and finances aside, that OC will qualify for European football sometime in the not to distant future, how will that play out with UEFA?

The only defence that the SFA can put forward WRT the issue of the 2011 European licence is that during the self certification process the club did not inform them of the outstanding tax bill and that their checking process, if there is one, was inadequate at the time but since then steps have been taken to ensure that there will be no repeat ( although as far as I know no changes have been made, stand to be corrected on that one Darryl)

So SFA get their knuckles wrapped by UEFA but what about the club?

The club have lied in order to gain a European licence and the financial gain that goes with it.

I doubt if there is a more serious offence in the UEFA rule book and if the OC/NC myth is to be perpetuated UEFA can add their substantial weight with a 5 or 10 year ban from all European competitions for the team currently playing out of Ibrox.

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on11:34 am - Oct 19, 2015


The haves and have-nots of European football revealed with the financial distribution for the Champions League and Europa League for 2014/15 as published by UEFA.

Champions League
http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/competitions/General/02/29/45/25/2294525_DOWNLOAD.pdf

Juventus was the top earner with €89.1M despite not winning the tournament as the Italian TV pool money was split between two clubs rather than Spain’s four. Barcelona “only” received €61.027M in total after winning the competition.

Europa League
http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/competitions/General/02/29/45/29/2294529_DOWNLOAD.pdf

Celtic received €3,422,507

View Comment

corrupt official

corrupt officialPosted on12:00 pm - Oct 19, 2015


fisiani says:
Monday, October 19, 2015 at 09:40
“There are clever ways to enter English football.”
========================================================
I’m not so sure what you suggest would be possible, or advisable. There are ownership of two clubs problems to contend with, or are you suggesting we should fold Celtic, and use a buying vehicle, say, Sevco 1888 for instance, and “sell” them our history, which can be passed to the purchased club, along with use of our name and stadium?
Where would we stand in the EPL if we used such “clever ways” and other European clubs decided to adopted them? Clubs with shady oil baron owners and astronomical start-up capital?
For me, Celtic are a Scottish club, and should be working here to improve matters.
I understand the lure of the financial rewards, but at what cost?.

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkPosted on12:06 pm - Oct 19, 2015


fisiani says:
Monday, October 19, 2015 at 09:40
‘…. or do they demand their place in the sun. .’
________
Demand? That smacks a little too much an attitude of mind expressed elsewhere by others who would add the word ‘rightful’ between ‘their’ and ‘place’.

It is arrant nonsense to speak of any Scottish club having an ‘entitlement’ to a place in English Football, in pretty much the same way that it was arrant nonsense for TRFC to expect to be ‘entitled’ to be regarded as RFC ,or to talk about ‘returning’ to their ‘rightful’ place.

And it is a national disgrace, and permanent stain on the character of Scottish Football, that its current administrators sold their personal integrity and the integrity of Sport by accommodating the blustering, bullying shyster who founded TRFC ,and who continue to protect and defend the subsequent series of highly questionable boards which have followed each other in ‘running’ the shambles that the new club has remained since its foundation.

View Comment

Avatar

christyboychristyboyPosted on12:34 pm - Oct 19, 2015


This would be helpful……..http://blogs.reuters.com/breakingviews/2015/10/16/the-devils-dictionary-of-post-crisis-finance-2/

View Comment

Avatar

joe mccormackPosted on12:54 pm - Oct 19, 2015


JC

ah but, there is always an ah but.

No matter how events transpire through the courts or otherwise all those up to their necks in it will be squealing at the top of their voices and blaming one another when the fat lady eventually sings.

Duped, fooled, misled, lied to…..you name it!

Yes, all of these will appropriate but none of it could have been made possible without the assistance and connivance of bankers, solicitors, accountants and administrators.

To my knowledge there have been several investigations into the behaviour and actions taken by the above professionals……Lo and behold nothing amiss, nothing to see here, move on.

If ever there was a case of looking after your own then this is a classic example.

Trust is thin on the ground and when that is lost the game’s indeed a bogey.

View Comment

Avatar

joe mccormackPosted on2:34 pm - Oct 19, 2015


If say for example you had recently borrowed money from a colleague to invest in a company due to some difficulties you had in releasing funds you have elsewhere……..millions according to the media, and that colleague was now pressing you for repayment, what would be your course of action if say due to some pesky court thingy that shareholding was in grave danger of being reduced to financial dust?

a) do you take the hit on the chin and pay up like a gentleman?
b) tell said colleague to do one?

All hypothetical of course!

View Comment

Avatar

paddyturnerPosted on2:35 pm - Oct 19, 2015


Lost & found

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkPosted on2:56 pm - Oct 19, 2015


joe mccormack says:
Monday, October 19, 2015 at 12:54
‘.. none of it could have been made possible without the assistance and connivance of bankers, solicitors, accountants and administrators.’
_________
Not to mention the assistance afforded by the extraordinary decision by Controller BBC Scotland TV not to follow-up, seriously and in depth, the very good early work of Mark Daly.

And, of course, Controller Radio Scotland was/is ultimately responsible for the crew on Sportsound etc refraining from anything like serious questioning, from the day the news of the financial havoc SDM had caused by his cheating, became known.

A succession of BBC staff men and ad hoc pundits, most of them either with a previous or current ‘privileged’ connection with SDM, or a connection as former players( with or without EBT loans ‘to pay back’) was, it seems to me, clearly warned to stay on ‘message’ ( untruthful as it was and is)- or be thrown to the wolves, or , indeed, the bears.

I have no words to describe the contempt I feel for such people, for whom there is no way back to any kind of acceptance as sports journalists who have much to contribute to Scottish football.

[ I am conscious that I have said all this many times before, but I’m also aware that the readership of this blog will inevitably include some/many who are new to it, perhaps even on a daily basis,and have not the time to go fully back to basics to get to the reasons why we take the views that we, or I generally take.

We cannot let mere passage of time allow the great football offence that SDM occasioned, and the (even greater) offence against Sporting Integrity perpetrated by the so-called guardians of our Sport , to be shrugged at passively, and for the baddies to think they have got away with it.

All attempts to bludgeon us into ‘moving on’ have to be resisted, until the wrong is corrected]

View Comment

Avatar

Barcabhoy (@Barcabhoy1)Posted on3:23 pm - Oct 19, 2015


Not sure how anyone outside of King or Taylor , and their respective advisers, would know whether Taylor lent money to King to invest and/or lend to Rangers .

I would imagine neither party would want this publicised. King because it would out him as not having the funds he claimed he would invest, and Taylor , because it would expose him to a potential concert party investigation. You can rule out advisers being loose with their tongue.

I’m not saying it 100% isn’t accurate , but it does strike me as one of these stories that is accepted as fact , without any proof. The more important point is that the risk environment has worsened markedly since King bought his shares and since the last loans were made.

King working in concert with the 3 Bears may be an issue in future, however for now the issue is whether they are prepared to lend money to Rangers with the probability it will be completely lost whilst weakening their position moving forward

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on4:08 pm - Oct 19, 2015


Warburton recruits another of the Brentford backroom boys-

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-make-another-hire-appoint-6661188

Looks like “Moneyball” is coming to Scotland with this one. And is there anyone left at Brentford- apart from former Ibrox Wonderkid Lewis Macleod?

View Comment

Avatar

redlichtiePosted on4:12 pm - Oct 19, 2015


It has been interesting reading the johnjames site and seeing some reality from the blue side peak through. I’m aware though that JJ is something of a lone voice and is also at times confused over some of the financial and legal aspects.

Today’s posting has some good and sensible stuff but is let down by things like :

“The solution here is simple. A new owner with a minimum of £15m to his name steps forward and pays off Ashley his £5m.”

Mmmm….RRM with those sort of funds have not exactly been queueing up to help over the past few years.

“We sell the land and move to a new stadium.”

What is the land actually worth especially with a stadium that will require careful and costly demolition? And who actually owns Ibrox? Who would buy land that is toxic in so many ways?

“We open our own outlet to sell our merchandising at the stadium and online, creating new brands if necessary.”

Mmmm…..I am sure MA and his colleagues at SD might have something to say about a competing merchandising operation.

“The concert party shares of Taylor, Park,Letham and King are bought for as little as possible to rid ourselves of another criminal. With their 34% and a deal done with Easdale for his shares, 60% equity could be acquired for less than £10m (20p per 1p ordinary share).”

And how is this great strategic plan to be brought off? Wishful thinking, I fear.

“Relocate to a new site in 2/3 years and if we can sell Auchenhowie to a developer, we could invest this money on the park. We cut a deal with Glasgow City Council. We move from Ibrox, freeing up this land for their plans, on the basis of allowing development at Auchenhowie. Should the assets revert to BDO, let them sort out the mess.”

Thought that they had sold the Ibrox land as an earlier part of the plan? Did they just mean the car park? But that is needed for use of part of Ibrox on match days. Is there not a planning/licencing issue over this?

JJ needs the input of some more thinking bears or perhaps he should participate in this site as it appears he has much more in common with views and ideas expressed here than he perhaps appreciates.

Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on5:38 pm - Oct 19, 2015


redlichtie October 19, 2015 at 4:12 pm #
—————————–
JJ can be viewed as a lone voice, but he is all too often guilty of creative accounting or blue sky thinking.

He appears to think that the current company incarnations can break contracts and come out of Administration with saleable assets intact, yet he rules Liquidation out as unacceptable.

I also read his previous blog “Whyte, Green & King – Fruit of a poisoned tree” which makes comment about what was revealed in the High Court on Friday. He seems to want to relate what was in the charge sheet with the totally separate damages claim made by Ticketus against Whyte and TRFC at the Chancery Court in London, then comes up with unaccounted sums of £11.2M or £10.26M and asks where the money went.

Reference to the contemporaneous accounts in D&P Creditors Reports, Lord Hodge’s opinion to D&P, and the decision on the Damages claim would provide him with much of the answers or explanations he seeks.

I previously tried to correct some of his incorrect assertions on one of his previous blogs, but my post didn’t pass his moderation.

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on5:40 pm - Oct 19, 2015


TRFC should be TRFCG is my previous post.

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on5:48 pm - Oct 19, 2015


Barca @ 3.23

Why does it weaken their position? By simply acknowledging that their front man had no money? Or are you referring to possible concert party actions against Taylor?

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on5:52 pm - Oct 19, 2015


Also, completely hypothetically,

Say you had 7 individuals expected up in court. One of them sings like the proverbial canary to save his feathers. Would you expect to see 6 in court and 1 ‘action deferred’?

View Comment

woodstein

woodsteinPosted on7:24 pm - Oct 19, 2015


redlichtie October 19, 2015 at 4:12 pm

“We sell the land and move to a new stadium.”

I think that the above is predicated on this:-

http://www.clydewaterfront.com/projects/greater-govan–glasgow-harbour

“The £1.2 billion Glasgow Harbour is a world-class regeneration project which spearheaded the revitalisation of the North bank of the river in this area.”

Projects

East Govan & Ibrox phase 1

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on7:29 pm - Oct 19, 2015


fisiani October 19, 2015 at 9:40 am #
Anyone really want to give up any possibility of European football for perhaps up to a decade? Every team in Europe knows the name Celtic at least. Which of these teams would seriously turn down a one off or two legged friendly Barcelona, Inter Milan, Porto, Ajax, esp if not or no longer in European competition. Celtic could have more European competition than we have at present.

Then what stops them doing that now? Of course, I meant Euro competition. Frankly, if Celtic want to go, they should just get on with it.

If they tried to buy a small English club and move it to Glasgow, though, they could fall foul of the cross border rules. Why should the SFA allow an EPL team to play regularly within its jurisdiction?

View Comment

neepheid

neepheidPosted on7:31 pm - Oct 19, 2015


My (overlengthy) letter to the Record of 25 September

Dear Sir

I wish to point out a factual inaccuracy in this article- http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/old-rangers-board-signed-deal-6510560

The relevant paragraph reads as follows-

“The club went into administration and subsequent forced liquidation by HMRC over a “phantom” £80million tax bill, The club were later cleared of having ever owed the taxman”

The “club” were, of course, put into administration for failing to pay over to HMRC several months PAYE tax and VAT. The “Big Tax Case” is still in the appeals process, so the “club” haven’t been cleared of anything yet, and even if they eventually win on all outstanding appeal points, there will still be over £20m owed to HMRC. That sum is not in dispute, and was the reason for RFC entering administration.

To say that “the club were later cleared of having ever owed the taxman” is clearly untrue. Here is a link to the liquidators’ report of last November-

http://www.bdo.co.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/879165/Rangers-Creditors-Circ-13-November-2014.pdf

From that report-

“5. EBT
As previously reported to creditors, HMRC appealed
the First Tier Tribunal (“FTT”) decision in
respect of the EBT Scheme previously operated by th
e Company, commonly known as the “Big
Tax” case. The Big Tax case represents c£72m of the
£94m claim submitted by HMRC in the
Liquidation proceedings, and may therefore have a ma
terial impact on the dividend payble to
unsecured creditors.”

So the HMRC claim was £92m, of which £72m is subject to an ongoing appeal process, and £22m is undisputed. It is impossible to reconcile these facts with the statement in your article that “the club were later cleared of ever owing the taxman”. On any construction the taxman is owed between £22m and £94m, the precise sum being contingent on an unfinished appeals process, but in any event not less than £22m.

Please let me when a correction is published. I really do expect better from a reputable newspaper.

And the Record’s reply received today-

Dear

Further to my recent email to you, below, please note that the Daily Record carried a clarification over this point in our regular page 2 column on Saturday.

Thank you for bringing this to our attention.

Regards

I can’t find this “clarification” online. Did anyone see it in the print edition? Which I would strongly advise against buying, by the way.

View Comment

Barcabhoy

BarcabhoyPosted on8:18 pm - Oct 19, 2015


Apologies if the has been explained before, and it probably has. How do you get insert “quote” element, such as in ScottC’s post at 7.29

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on8:47 pm - Oct 19, 2015


Use blockquote in braces, Barca

http://www.w3schools.com/tags/

View Comment

woodstein

woodsteinPosted on9:09 pm - Oct 19, 2015


neepheid October 19, 2015 at 7:31 pm
———————————
DR correction
File attached (no I didn’t buy it, t’was my wife) our house is a democracy!

View Comment

neepheid

neepheidPosted on9:25 pm - Oct 19, 2015


woodstein October 19, 2015 at 9:09 pm #
neepheid October 19, 2015 at 7:31 pm
———————————
DR correction
File attached (no I didn’t buy it, t’was my wife) our house is a democracy!
===================

Thanks, Woodstein- and don’t worry, not many of us live in a domestic democracy, apart from those who are single!

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on10:26 pm - Oct 19, 2015


I see that SDM’s legal beagle Andrew Thornhill QC is being investigated for misconduct.

He is alleged to have used a dodgy charity’s funds in a tax avoidance scheme, would you believe.

http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/article/leading-tax-qc-faces-misconduct-hearing/591416

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on10:35 pm - Oct 19, 2015


I’ve been trying to post a link about Andrew Thornhill QC being investigated by the Bar for misconduct, re some tax avoidance scheme with a dodgy Charity’s funds, but the post keeps disappearing into the ether.

I tried the comment moderation thread but got the same result…. any clues?

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on11:23 pm - Oct 19, 2015


I’m happy to report that I live in a perfect domestic democracy , at least that’s what I’m telt!

View Comment

Avatar

Big PinkPosted on2:42 am - Oct 20, 2015


Ej. No posts in moderation. I will investigate in the morning

View Comment

Avatar

Paddy TurnerPosted on7:23 am - Oct 20, 2015


Avid Reader Rare Poster……………..

My memory keeps telling me that in early discussions between SDM & CW, when asked where the debt was by CW, SDM informed him about the Ticketus Scheme of bankrolling, and that RFC had an years settlement outstanding. SDM advised CW how the scheme worked and provided him with all the necessary contact details.

I also have memory, presumably from the CF declared details, of lengthy CW negotiations with Ticketus Director on what was required to complete the deal.

Makes you wonder what masquerades as high falutting businessmen get up to……

Paddy T

View Comment

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on7:33 am - Oct 20, 2015


@neep

2015 at 7:31 pm #

My (overlengthy) letter to the Record of 25 September
——–

Well done neep! That DR article was bewildering. As always, editorial corrections are on the back of a postage stamp.

In reality, the damage is done in that a great many have taken the original story at face value and never seen the correction. It’s how the media is acting more and more. Put out an untruth In a prominent article — about a person or organisation — inflict the damage, retract later only when forced to.

Not just the Record that has form for this, sadly.

A few things on Thornhill story:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-barrister-andrew-thornhill-qc-5278088

http://m.accountingweb.co.uk/article/leading-tax-qc-faces-misconduct-hearing/591416

PS BP, ever considered a professional hosting package at WordPress.com? Not too expensive, stable, and pretty secure.

View Comment

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on8:04 am - Oct 20, 2015


redlichtie October 19, 2015 at 4:12 pm
————

Red, John James did seem to be in pipe dream mode yesterday. An oddly contradictory piece. On the one hand, selling the stadium and Murray Park, and on the other, all assets reverting to BDO.

The underlying thought of creating a newco newco playing somewhere else is what we’ve been on about here for years, with Hampden also being a suggestion.. I think he mentioned a ‘deal could be done with the SFA’ but reality is a newco newco has to seek admiitance to the SPFL over again. Or would the other 41 clubs agitate to parachute a newco newco into a higher league?

View Comment

Avatar

ChristyboyPosted on8:33 am - Oct 20, 2015


Aye, they know how to bury retractions. Editors should be made to put the retraction on the same page and the same size as the original article. Fair’s fair and all that……..

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on9:55 am - Oct 20, 2015


Danish Pastry October 20, 2015 at 8:04 am #

I think he mentioned a ‘deal could be done with the SFA’ but reality is a newco newco has to seek admiitance to the SPFL over again. Or would the other 41 clubs agitate to parachute a newco newco into a higher league?

One would imagine that, should a newco newco be created, any admittance to the SPFL would have to be subject to a playoff against the lowland/highland team that would otherwise be playing the bottom placed League 2 team.

It would hardly seem reasonable to do otherwise. 🙂

View Comment

Corrupt official

Corrupt officialPosted on10:32 am - Oct 20, 2015


scottc October 20, 2015 at 9:55 am
“any admittance to the SPFL would have to be subject to a playoff against the lowland/highland team that would otherwise be playing the bottom placed League 2 team.

It would hardly seem reasonable to do otherwise. 🙂
——————————————————————
As soon as they meet their audited accounts requirements 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

jimmciPosted on11:24 am - Oct 20, 2015


Like most Scots , I’m sure, I watched the rugby World Cup tie from Twickenham and was both enthralled by the play and desperately disappointed to lose out in yet another Scottish heartbreak story.

Did the ref get it wrong at the end? I’m not au fait with the rules of rugby but took it as read that the match commentators and analysts were correct in saying that we lost to a wrong call by the ref – what many would describe as an “honest mistake” since we all know that refs don’t go out on the field determined to make an error. They sometimes happen but they’re always honest mistakes.

I therefore expected mild opprobrium being directed towards the ref by our good old SMSM pack – you know the type reserved for missing the odd obvious hand ball. I anticipated the media also telling us we only had ourselves to blame and that we had had another 79 minutes to go win the tie.

Wow, was I wrong. Kenny MacIntyre on Sportsound last night sounded like he might explode such was his anger towards the ref. Tom English had already done so in his web piece but for good measure he did so again.

I kept waiting to hear then say it was an honest mistake but am still waiting. The old “even themselves up over time” chestnut didn’t even make an appearance.
Calls are being made for the ref to be removed from officiating ever again. This cost Scotland a chance of glory! I recall as Celtic’s chance of a treble went up in smoke due to SIX officials all missing a hand ball virtually every commentator absolving the officials of a deliberately bad call as was Mr Muir on Saturday last. They just got it wrong they cried as one – like Mr Jaubert so move on? Not a bit of it.

How our media really do stink!

Again, though, well done Scotland for giving us such a thrilling game and I am really disappointed we were beaten in such a manner.

View Comment

woodstein

woodsteinPosted on11:41 am - Oct 20, 2015


Danish Pastry October 20, 2015 at 7:33 am

I have noticed when I split a log, it can be rotten inside, and all the slaters pour out?

View Comment

Allyjambo

AllyjamboPosted on12:16 pm - Oct 20, 2015


Danish Pastry October 20, 2015 at 7:33 am #
@neep

2015 at 7:31 pm #

My (overlengthy) letter to the Record of 25 September
——–

Well done neep! That DR article was bewildering. As always, editorial corrections are on the back of a postage stamp.

In reality, the damage is done in that a great many have taken the original story at face value and never seen the correction. It’s how the media is acting more and more. Put out an untruth In a prominent article — about a person or organisation — inflict the damage, retract later only when forced to.

Not just the Record that has form for this, sadly.

A few things on Thornhill story:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-barrister-andrew-thornhill-qc-5278088

http://m.accountingweb.co.uk/article/leading-tax-qc-faces-misconduct-hearing/591416

PS BP, ever considered a professional hosting package at WordPress.com? Not too expensive, stable, and pretty secure.
____________

What a disusting place in the world people like Thornhill inhabit! He certainly represents some extremely immoral high earners…

View Comment

Corrupt official

Corrupt officialPosted on1:19 pm - Oct 20, 2015


jimmci October 20, 2015 at 11:24 am

The SMSM will always be the SMSM jimmci, but look at the reaction of the govrning body ! Do we want the SFA to always be the SFA?
I know this won’t over-haul the result, or ease the pain,but don’t you just think, “Sore, but fair enough, it appears a genuine mistake! These things happen”
I feel the rugby boys can man up, and no doubt look for ways to improve decision making, if not eradicate it completely….Contrast
that with the football authorities approach, and I know which one I prefer.
If football authorities were forced to issue three or four of these week in week out, there would soon be some positive and improving action taken.
There are no failings when you do not admit to any

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/oct/20/craig-joubert-rugby-world-cup-semi-finals-world-rugby

View Comment

tayred

tayredPosted on2:09 pm - Oct 20, 2015


jimmci October 20, 2015 at 11:24 am #

Good points, but there is a massive difference between the rugby setup and football. The TMO is present. That is supposed to stop bad decisions being made, or at least thats what we are led to believe.

The trouble is, the referee isn’t free to ask for assistance for certain issues. Sounds stupid, but it was done to stop the game from being slowed down to much. So technically, the referee couldn’t ask the TMO what he thought. That said he could have asked the simple “anything I should be aware of”. The current situation is a nonsense. It is plausible to query anything in the build up to a try, but not for a penalty. Both point scoring situations, whats the difference?

But anyway, thats what a lot of anger is directed at. Along with Hogg being flattened off the ball in the play immediately before the penalty incident that the TMO chose to ignore, whilst he was all over the Maitland “knock-on”, which I think is a bigger issue than the penalty incident! Again, violence ok, technical infringement – off you go.

Oh and Joubert sprinting from the pitch immediately after blowing the whistle is unforgivable. Would suggest he was more than aware of what was going on. Lets all sort of conspiracy theories sprout wings. If you make a mistake you have to put your hands up and accept it. Rugby lays big claims to respect from its players towards the referee, referees should show the same to the players. Especially after what was a superb game of rugby played in a superb spirit.

View Comment

paddy malarkey

paddy malarkeyPosted on2:15 pm - Oct 20, 2015


easyJambo October 19, 2015 at 10:35 pm #

This ? http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-barrister-andrew-thornhill-qc-5278088

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on3:50 pm - Oct 20, 2015


paddy malarkey October 20, 2015 at 2:15 pm #
——————————

That was the story, although it was from the “accountancyage” website. DP put up the links to both sources this morning.

But thanks anyway……. and to DP too.

View Comment

Avatar

tearsofjoyPosted on3:52 pm - Oct 20, 2015


On the rugger front, much has been made of the Joubert decision (and the great pains IRB have gone to in explaining why the refs hands were tied in relation to calling – or not – on theTMO ). But that’s not what irks me about the outcome.

For me , Joubert’s credentials were clearly established 4 years ago and he should have been removed (or whatever the rugger terminology is) from the referees list as not fit for purpose.

But to the day in question – I am still waiting on the IRB explaining why Hogg could be almost knocked out after a very late challenge and yet Joubert, the touch judge AND the TMO saw nothing amiss ? I find that inexplicable. I thought this was what the TMO was supposed to be for ? Apologies if this sounds like sour grapes. Joubert must be forgiven (despite having “previous”) so I’ll accept he acted in good faith (reluctantly) but to me , the real debate should be about Hogg as, if they’d got that call right , Joubert wouldn’t have had to give his S hemisphere pals a helping hand).

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on3:57 pm - Oct 20, 2015


FC United of Manchester leading the way again. Just like the living wage

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/fc-united-reject-bbc-request-6667241#rlabs=11%20rt$sitewide%20p$10

View Comment

Comments are closed.