A Blog by James Forrest for TSFM
I am a socialist, and as a socialist I believe in the fundamental goodness of people. Some people find that hard to believe when they read the stuff I write.
I published my first novel recently, on politics and the corrupting nature of it, and it is a deeply cynical book, a book where no-one has clean hands come the end. What has surprised some of those who’ve read it is that I didn’t focus on the lies and smears of the right, but the hypocrisy and deceit of those who claim to be of the left.
Corruption, you see, doesn’t respect political boundaries or points of view. It’s like rainwater. It finds every crack, and gets in there.
My political beliefs revolve around two apparently paradoxical elements; the belief in the inherent decency of people and the need for a strong, and powerful, state. I believe the second underpins the first, and this brings me into conflict with a lot of people, some on the left and some on the right. Too many people see the state as inherently evil, as something that interferes too much in the lives of ordinary people. As something suffocating.
Yet the state exists to protect us. It exists to provide a safety net. It exists to regulate and to oversee. If the state is made up of bad people, if the gears of society are captured by those with malicious or selfish intent, the results are obvious; war, corruption, chaos.
The vast majority of our problems in the modern age can be neatly summed up in two lines from Yeats’ poem “The Second Coming”, which I used to open my novel. “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”
We live in a time when those who are protecting their own interests have assumed such power that they’ve cowed the rest of us. They have become a law unto themselves. They have changed the nature of the game, because they have sapped our will to the extent some barely put up a fight anymore. The weak get weaker, and the strong use their strength to crush the rest even more. It is a vicious struggle, a downward spiral.
Society is held together not only by the endeavour and common interests of its citizens but by a collection of laws. We elect the people who make those laws. They do so in our name, and we can remove that right every four years. That is a powerful thing, and we do not appreciate it enough. The present corruption exists because we allow it to exist.
The people around me continue to puzzle over my uncommon interest in the affairs of a football club on the west of Glasgow. My own club plays in the east end. I tell those who ask that my primary interest in the goings-on at the club calling itself Rangers is no longer about football; how could it be, after all? With promotion this year they are still a full two divisions below us, emasculated, skint, weak and unstable. If we were fortunate enough to draw them in cup competition the match would be over, as a tie, by the halfway point … in the first half.
In footballing terms they are an utter irrelevance.
Rangers is more than a football club to me. They are a symbol. Their unfolding calamity is an on-going outrage. What is happening there, what is being allowed to happen, is an offense to decency. It is a stain on the face of our country.
In short, it is a scandal. It is a scandal without parallel in sport.
Yet it’s not just a sports story either. If it was, I might not be so focussed on it. What is happening at Rangers is a colossal failure of governance. It is a damning indictment against the very people who are supposed to oversee our game. It is a disgraceful abrogation of responsibility from those at the top, those who claim to be “running things.”
If this is not a failure of governance it is a result of corruption at the heart of our national sport. It says they are bought and paid for, and I will say no such thing here.
So let’s give them the benefit of the doubt. We’ll say instead that what they are is weak, indecisive, inept and disconnected from reality.
It reminds me of our political class, which has become insular and ignorant about what the public wants, and what it needs. It’s not a wonder parties like UKIP can achieve national vote shares of 25% at local elections. Nigel Farage strikes me as a dog-whistle politician, the kind who knows how to appeal to a select group of voters. He is little different to Charles Green, the man who beguiled Rangers fans into handing over large amounts of money, because he was “standing up for the club.” It is easy to do what he did, easy to do what Farage is doing.
Real leadership requires toughness. Say what you like about the Tories, but they have that in spades. Yeats was right about the worst being full of passionate intensity. Green was. Farage is. Cameron and Osborne personify it in their political outlook.
It is easy to be cowed by blunt force politics, and by “tough talking Yorkshire men” and venomous speeches about “strivers and skivers.” The politics of divide and conquer is the oldest form of politics there is, and it’s no surprise to see it practiced by some of the vested interests in the game here in Scotland. Yet, lest we forget … something significant happened last year. The maligned and the ignored, the weak and the voiceless found something they never realised they had. They discovered that, in a very real sense, the power was in their hands.
Last year, the fans rose up when the governing bodies and the media went all-out to save Rangers from the self-inflicted wounds caused by a decade of cheating, malpractice and ineptitude. I have no problem calling that what it was.
What happened at Rangers seemed incredible, but it was all too predictable, and some of us had been talking about it for years before it hit. The Association seemed caught in the headlights but it would amaze me if they really were as insular and ignorant as they appeared. They must have known how bad the outlook was for Rangers. They just chose to ignore it.
They were aided and abetted by a thoroughly disreputable media, a collection of cowards and compromisers, charlatans and frauds, masquerading as journalists, but who long ago laid aside any claim to be bold investigators and settled for commenting on events as they unfolded. More often than not, with their ill-informed opinions, sometimes due to weaknesses in intellect and others wilfully ignorant, they failed even in that.
Entire newspapers became PR machines for crooks and swindlers. They aided in the scam because they didn’t do their jobs, some because they were lazy, some because they were incompetent and others because they wanted a seat at the table and were willing to sacrifice whatever integrity they once had in exchange for one.
That all of this was embraced by the Rangers fans is amazing to me. They trusted when they should have been asking questions. They closed their eyes, covered their ears and sang their battle tunes at the top of their voices so they wouldn’t have to hear anything they didn’t like. As incredible as I found it then, and still find it now – and now, even more so, when they have already seen the results of it once – I find it pathetic too, and I do feel pity for some of them.
A lot of these people are genuine football fans, and nothing more. They have no interest in the phony narrow nationalism, or the over-blown religion, or the notion of supremacy which manifested itself in a ludicrous statement from McCoist when interviewed recently on Sky.
Some of the Rangers fans look at their team of duds, kids and journeymen, they look at a boardroom of cowards and crooks, they look at a failing manager in his first (and last) job in the game and at a dark future and are not in the least bit impressed by, or interested in, the chest-out arrogance espoused in those ridiculous words “we are the people.” They know full well that their present crisis was made by men like McCoist, and they understand that pretentious posturing is not an act born of strength, but a scrambling around in the gutter, and a symptom of weakness.
They understand their position, and they hate it. And because they care about Rangers, because they value the club, because they cherish those things that made it a great Scottish institution, they want that back. They understand that before the Union Jack waving, Sash singing, poppy wearing, Nazi saluting, Orange element became the public face of their support Rangers meant something else, and that, above all things, is what pains them the most.
People do not hate Rangers. When the country appeared to turn its back last year, they were turning the back on favouritism and the bending of rules. Yet it would be a lie to say that there is not an element of dislike in the gleeful mockery of many rival fans.
But they don’t hate Rangers either. They hate the version of it around which a certain section of the support continues to dance. They hate the version which hates, and so too do many, many, many Rangers supporters, and they definitely deserve better.
David Murray chose not to openly challenge that version. Indeed, he encouraged certain strands of it to flourish and grow, with his “Britishness Days” and his effort to turn the club into the “team that supports the troops.” Other clubs have done as much, if not more, for the British Army than the one that plays out of Ibrox. Other clubs have given more money. Other clubs have lent their support to those on the front lines. They just chose to do it with respect, and with class, and with dignity. They chose to do it in private, understanding that there eventually comes a tipping point between looking after the ends of the soldiers and using them to promote your own.
The army has not battened on to Rangers. Rangers has battened on to them, and although it is unclear when an altruistic motive became darker, what started out as a gesture of solidarity is now used to entrench division and promote a notion of superiority.
Craig Whyte took over from Murray and immediately understood the lure of the “dog whistle.” He knew too that the media would accept whatever he told them, without question, and as he spoke up for “Rangers traditions” he made sure the lunatic fringe was well onside. He met face to face with the hard-core extremists in the support first and made them his praetorian guard. They spoke up for him until the day the club entered administration.
So, whereas Murray pandered to them and Whyte used them to further his own ends, it was only a matter of time before someone suggested to Charles Green that he could use the same tactics to win over the support. He went even further and blatantly promoted and encouraged this mind-set, and stoked the hate and nonsense to frightening new heights. The same people who cheered Whyte to the rafters jumped on board the Big Blue Bus and the results are clear.
Through all of it, the ordinary Rangers fan has seen his club buffered against the rocks, battered, broken, smashed to smithereens and sunk. Now there’s a big hole in the side of the lifeboat, and they are terrified that further tragedies await.
They are right to be concerned. Much of the media is still not telling them what they need to know. The people in charge of their club – the owners who have lied, the former hack who covered up the truth about Whyte and now acts as a mouthpiece for Green, the “club legends” who are content to sup with the devil and take his greasy coin when they should be standing toe-to-toe with the fans – are trying to silence those members of the press who do have facts to present.
How many times now have media outlets been banned from Ibrox for daring to report the truth? The manager who demanded the names of a committee last year defends those inside the walls who are desperate to keep secret the things that are going on. He is either an unprincipled coward, or he is, himself, bought and paid for. The fans suffer for it.
The “inconvenient truth” is still being kept from them, and this denies them any chance to play an active role in their club. Indeed, it is all too possible that they’ve passed a point of no return, and that their club is heading for a new liquidation event and it can no longer be stopped.
In either case, their power has been eroded to the point at which they must feel they have nothing left to do but stand back and watch what happens next.
They are wrong. I am a socialist. I believe in the inherent good of people. I think the ordinary decent Rangers fans are the only people left who can save their club … and the means by which they will do it is as simple as it could be.
They must stand up for “big government.” They must embrace the need for a “strong state.” They must lobby the SFA, and they must trust the SFA and they must get the SFA to follow its own rules and thereby save them from any further harm.
There is a tendency amongst some Celtic fans to see our governing bodies as pro-Rangers. If it is true then those running our game are ruining Scottish football without benefiting the thing they love more. The incalculable harm that has been done to Rangers in the last 20 some months is a direct result of the subservient media and the willingness of the football authorities to be “deaf, dumb and blind.” Those who believe this has actually helped the Ibrox club have not been paying attention in class. It has irrevocably scarred them, and it may yet have played a hand in destroying them once and for all, as a force if not as a club entirely.
For years, the SFA sat and did nothing as a club in their association operated a sectarian signing policy. They did nothing whilst the fans sang sectarian songs. In their failure to act they strengthened those elements of the Rangers support, instead of isolating, alienating and eventually helping to eliminate those who saw that club as a totem pole of division and hate. Their failure over EBT’s, and their lack of scrutiny, led to one of the greatest scandals in the history of sport, and I say that with no equivocation at all. The testimony of their registrations officer in the Lord Nimmo Smith investigation was a disgrace and in years to come it will rank as one of the most disreputable and damaging moments in the association’s history.
The most egregious failures of all were the failures in the so-called “fit and proper person” tests, which allowed first Whyte and then Charles Green to assume controlling positions at Ibrox. They will pass the buck and say the responsibility lies with the club itself, in much the same way as they are content to let the club investigate itself at the present time, but any neutral who looks at this stance knows it is unprincipled and spineless. It’s like letting the defence set the terms at a trial. It is foxes investigating the chicken coop.
It is a blueprint for corruption, and a recipe for disaster.
It is now too late for the SFA to declare Green “unfit”, as it was too late when they finally slapped that title on Craig Whyte. He and his allies own Rangers, and they control its destiny. They can push the club to the wall if they choose, in the final extremity, if that gets them what they want. The time for changing that is past. The damage has already been done. The barbarians are not at the gates. They are inside the walls, and sacking the city.
The SFA will be forced to punish Rangers for the sins of the owners, for the second time in as many years, and whilst it is right that the club face up to that, all the better to send a message to other clubs and other owners, the SFA cannot be allowed to slither off the hook here as though this was none of their doing. Green will skip off into the sunset. Craig Whyte has yet to pay his fine. These people never cared about Scottish football and they don’t care now.
The SFA are supposed to. Our governing body is supposed to govern, for the good of the whole game, and not as a support system for a single club. What they have allowed to happen on their watch is absolutely shameful and if the people responsible were men at all, with any sense of accountability, they would resign en masse.
They can pretend ignorance, but only the truly ignorant would accept that. Craig Whyte was not inside Ibrox a week before RTC and other sites were dismantling his entire business history, with some of the people here doing the work the SFA would not. Whyte himself claims to have made the governing bodies aware of the scale of what was facing the club, and they did nothing at all. Heads should have rolled a year ago.
In October of last year, on this very site, I posted an article in which I wrote:
“Which isn’t to say the due diligence matter isn’t worrying, because, of course, it is. Again, no-one is going to convince me that the SFA has conducted proper due diligence on Charles Green and his backers. No-one will convince me they are satisfied that this club is in safe hands, and that the game in this country will not be rocked by a further implosion at Ibrox. They failed to properly investigate Craig Whyte, because of lax regulations requiring disclosure from the club itself, regulations which are just a joke, but they can be forgiven for that as the press was talking sheer nonsense about him having billions at his disposal, and a lot of people (but not everyone!) were either convinced or wanted to be convinced by him.
To have witnessed what Whyte did, to have witnessed the Duff & Phelps “process” of finding a buyer, and having Green essentially emerge from nowhere, with a hundred unanswered questions as to his background and financing, for the SFA to have given this guy the go ahead, only for it to blow up in their faces later, would annihilate the credibility of the governing body and necessitate resignations at every level. There would be no hiding place.”
There are times when it is fun to be right, but this is not one of them. It is dispiriting and disquieting to have been so on the nose. It scares the Hell out of me, as someone who loves football in this country, to have seen this matter clearly when the people running our game apparently either did not or chose to ignore very real, very obvious, concerns. The Internet Bampots had no special insight or access to information that was denied those at the SFA. We just weren’t prepared to ignore it and pretend that it wasn’t there. There was too much at stake.
I have become convinced that things will never change until the Rangers supporters join us in demanding the full and unabridged truth here. They need to come out from under the bed, and confront their fears. They need to be willing to take the consequences, so that their club can emerge clean from this, and start again, with all this behind them.
And it can all happen with one simple thing. The application of the rules.
The existence of laws comes down to a simple principle; they protect society from those elements within it who are interested only in their own selfish ends. We may cry out at those rules and regulations we see as “restrictive”, but the law was not made to restrict our freedoms but to protect them. Had the SFA years ago acted against Rangers sectarian signing policy, and the songs from the stands, the club would not have mutated to the point where there was no help on hand when they needed it the most. Let’s not kid ourselves about this; Whyte and Green were only able to grab control because the club itself has a dreadful image which put off respectable and responsible buyers. The SFA could have helped change that perception years ago and did nothing.
The SFA could have conducted its own investigation into who Craig Whyte was. They could have asked David Murray for full disclosure when he was running up £80 million of debt, a sum of money that is beyond belief for a single club in a small provincial backwater league. Had they had the guts to do that the club would never have spent itself into oblivion and forced the hand of Lloyds, which led indirectly to their ignominious end.
The SFA could have fully investigated Charles Green and the means by which he took control, instead of rushing through a license. His emergence at the last minute was transparently suspicious and designed to force them into a quick decision, but they did not have to bow to that pressure by making one, without being in possession of the facts, as it is now 100% clear they were not.
Had they asked for every document, had they insisted on legal affidavits and personal securities from investors (and this would have been perfectly legitimate and is common place in other licensing areas) none of this would have come to pass. After Craig Whyte they had a moral responsibility to the rest of the game to get this one right and their failure is without parallel in the history of Scottish football.
As the club hurtles towards a new abyss, names are cropping up which should send a shudder down the spines of every honest, genuine supporter of not only Rangers but every team in the land. The SFA claims that a strong Rangers is essential for the sake of Scottish football, but they have been extraordinarily lax in protecting that club, and therefore the game, from destructive elements. Craig Whyte and Charles Green had dubious personal histories, and the acquisition of the club itself was mired in controversy and scandal. Yet it was allowed.
Neither Green nor Whyte were known to have operated outside the law, yet neither was worthy of trust or stood up to scrutiny. Neither man should ever have been granted the status as fit and proper persons to assume a role in our national sport, and if it is true of them what can we say about the three men who are, presently, being touted as the Great White Hopes for a bright, new Rangers future; Dave King and the Easdale brothers?
King recently cut a deal with the South African government over an on-going dispute over taxes. In other words, he pled guilty and accepted the central plank of their argument; that for years he was engaged in wilfully with-holding vast revenues from their Treasury. The media does not like to put it like that, and the SFA seems willing to ignore it utterly, and this would be scandalous enough. But it does not stop there. HRMC rules – as well as the SFA’s own governance documents – actually bar him from serving on the board of the new club.
Last but not least, aside from being an admitted tax cheat, King is also awaiting trial in South Africa, having been indicted for corruption, forgery and fraud – 300 charges in total. Yet as recently as last week, we were told that the Association was willing to look at him and consider representations from his lawyers. This is almost beyond belief.
If Dave King’s position is untenable, and he is yet to be convicted of a crime, what can we say about the position of the Easdale’s? One of the two brothers, Sandy, has already served jail time. He is a convicted criminal, a fraudster nonetheless, who’s “victim” was the same Treasury who are appealing one case involving the old club and liquidated it entirely over another. This is precisely the kind of “businessman” the fit and proper person test was supposed to weed out, and if the SFA holds its nose here the reek will stink out the halls at Hampden for decades. If King or the Easdale’s are judged fit and proper, then who exactly is the test for? What exactly do you have to do to fail it? How do we explain the existence of laws, when these are not applied?
Pascal says “Law without force is impotent.” The SFA’s weakness has allowed one version of Rangers to destroy itself, and has allowed an existential risk to another. If the next power at Rangers resides in South Africa or Greenock I can say with some certainty that the Association is engaged in an even more dangerous roll of the dice, because the surfacing of fresh scandal will be an ever present risk, and will be of the sort no-one will survive.
The damage to Scottish football will take years to heal. The Scottish game has been through enough trauma. It does not need more. It barely survived the last calamity to hit Rangers. The rest of us should not be forced to pay the price of the next one.
The greater damage will be done to Rangers itself. If the Green crisis ends in another collapse – as it well might; another administration event is a certainty, and another liquidation is a much more likely prospect than it was before 14 February 2012 – the club will once again have to start from the bottom, and this time the reputational damage will be impossible to repair. The club faces internal strife, sporting sanctions, and criminal investigations. The last takeover might be declared a fraud. the Whyte takeover will almost certainly be. The share issue might be invalid, as well as criminal, and the people involved may well end up in jail. Lawsuits could follow from investors, there could be as yet unknown consequences from the Upper Tier Tax Tribunal (thank you Brogan Rogan for pointing out what those might be) and a host of other issues.
Rangers fans must be the loudest voices here. How do you want the world to view your club in years to come? Do you want one to be proud of, or one forever associated with the shame and disgrace of these days gone by? The one which bailed out on its tax obligations. The one with supporters who disgrace your very name. The one which allowed Whyte and Green to take you to the cleaners and send you to the wall. The one which handed over control to one convicted criminal and another awaiting trial. Do you want to be reborn clean, or mired in the muck?
David Murray destroyed your financial stability. He made it so no bank would issue you a line of credit and no investor of note wanted to buy. Craig Whyte liquidated you. Charles Green has cast the future of the Newco into doubt and acted in a manner which has annihilated your credibility with the financial markets for decades to come.
Between these three men, they have taken everything from you, and the press and the people who run the game here, as well as some of your own blindly ignorant fans, have allowed them to do all this and more. Now they conspire to hand the keys to Ibrox to other men of questionable character, who will wreck further havoc on the reputation of the club.
The Scottish Football Association has damaged the game it was supposed to protect, but above all else their greatest failure of governance was a failure to protect one of its biggest clubs from its own excesses and those of its owners.
Rangers fans, the SFA have betrayed your trust, more than the trust of any other club. What you must insist on now is full disclosure and transparency from the powers that be in Hampden. The SFA has to end the charade of allowing your club to handle this in-house. They must hand everything over to an outside agency – whether a legal one, or a footballing body like UEFA – and they must demand co-operation and answers, and threaten to withhold the license if they don’t get them.
You must not be afraid of that. You must embrace it. The men with their hands on the gears at Ibrox are motivated by money, and nothing more. If the license is withdrawn their “investments” are worthless. They cannot risk that.
You must demand that the rules on fit and proper persons are applied, and where necessary even made stronger, to prevent your club falling into unclean hands. You must demand that they protect your reputation from further damage, by getting this all out there and acting accordingly, even if that means your club does not play football for at least a year.
You must be willing to suck it all up, knowing that what will emerge is a Rangers which has been cleansed and moves forward with honour, and dignity, led by custodians who treasure it rather than those who know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
The Rangers Standard has recently emerged as a genuine voice for those in your support who are sick and tired of what Rangers has become, and want it restored to something that is worthy of the love and respect in which you hold it. On that website, there are discussions about the kind of club you seek to be and about whether the institution of Rangers is about more than just football.
If that’s how you feel about it then you know it is about more than how many titles the club can claim, about more than just results on the park, about more than just the game. Rangers, like Celtic, is an idea. It has to be something you are proud of.
I am a socialist, but one with a fevered imagination and a tendency to write very dark things. This piece won’t have been good reading for some of you (perhaps all of you haha!) but I think there’s more hope in here than in other things I’ve written.
In spite of everything that’s come to pass, I still believe. I believe in Scottish football. I believe in our system of football governance, even if those who are working in it are failing on some level.
In society, as much as we strain against them, laws exist for our protection. To fail to enforce them is to leave us at the mercy of those elements who would do us harm. The rules of football ensure the protection of all clubs, not just a few.
The failure to enforce the rules has never had graver consequences than here in Scotland. The irony is that bending and breaking them has hurt the one club those violations were designed to help. It cannot be allowed to happen again.
The rules must be applied without fear or favour.
The best must find their conviction, and their passionate intensity once more.
James is a co-editor of the On Fields of Green Blog http://www.onfieldsofgreen.com/
A brutally honest post lifted from RM, from an apparently genuine TRFC fan with 600 posts to their name.
=========
“Whatever is left in the bank won’t last long if we continue to pay Lee McCulloch more money that the combined wage of our opponents full team.
It will not last long if we continue to pay Ally McCoist more than the combined wage of every manager in SFL2.
It will be gone even quicker as long as Ally is signing “30 year old lumps a wid” with 2 previous knee operations and the pace of a pregnant hippo and paying them 10k a week in SFL2. Oh, and did I mention no resale value.
Maybe, just maybe The Super Duper Ally Brigade will wake up and think about this unsustainable approach to managing Rangers.
sadly it might be too late by then. “
How the LNS investigation into non disclosure of contractual payments by Oldco RFC may help Hearts avoid a points penalty for UBIG’s administration.
The LNS report was SPL commissioned and it is they who will make a judgement on Hearts.
LNS approached the RFC issue taking cognisance of the rules that were in place at various times between 2001 and 2012, therefore made his judgements using 4 sets of rules.
The rule change regarding the “Group Undertaking” element was only added on 1st July 2012, thus anything relating to Hearts funding by UBIG prior to that date should not be relevant.
Hearts are on record as saying that UBIG stopped funding the club, from January 2012, thus should be able to make a strong case that they should not be sanctioned under the current rule.
Captain Haddock says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 12:33
“I too worked in Possil, and one of my first sights was seeing a dog walking around with a half brick in its mouth”.
___________
Possil dogs need to be seen to be tough. A stick would have been a bit too Kelvinside.
Seen a guy in the locale with his fighting dog hanging from the branch of a tree by its mouth. The branch bobbing up and down just a few feet from the ground under the weight of the wee beast. The guy must have bent the branch down to allow the dog to get a grip then let it spring back up. Strengthens the dog’s jaw and teeth apparently. Perhaps I should have said something but didn’t bother. Its quite a rough area but like all such places the people seem to growl at you but if you happen to fall into a conversation for some reason, you realise they’re the salt of the earth
regarding my last post…
ironic innit…
obviously doesn’t translate well in the written word!
just to let you know, those of you who hadn’t sussed it…
facetiousness is my default setting…
zerotolerance1903 suggested (reasonably) that it was because it was a personal email address. However, in the latest batch Phil Betts personal email address has not been redacted.
To me, this looks like a whole batch of documents that has been cobbled together and CF is ploughing through it randomly posting things that look sort of interesting. He or she would be better off crowdsourcing the whole lot in one go, but I suppose there is some responsibility to be exercised.
allyjambo says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 17:19
It would mean TRFC can sign as many players as they like, during the transfer window, but as they can’t register them, they’ll be paying their wages but won’t be allowed to play them until the second half of next season. That is if the SFA/SFL stick to the rules…and they wouldn’t break the rules would they?
=================================
They can sign and register any ‘free agent’ after 1 Sep, I’m sure a signing on fee could be arranged to compensate any loss of earnings over the summer
Forres Dee (@ForresDee) says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 12:54
“Has anyone put together a précis of all the reports/panels, who said/did what and when”?
———————-
I’ve just started to collect web addresses posted today. I know Auldheid (possibly neepheid also) and HirsutePursuit have previously posted up SFA/SPL/SFL rules documents so until I have all these it will be far from a complete listing.
I’ll ‘dropbox’ a list in a few weeks if I think it is sufficiently complete. Luckily I don’t need to be acquainted with all this stuff as other posters are and generally contribute when their knowledge is required.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/142055727/what-murray-knew
In this, there is a reference in the Takeover Panel Report to something that happened in 1998 – when Craig was “still in shorts”.
http://www.therangersstandard.co.uk/index.php/articles/current-affairs/204-paul-murray-the-rangers-standard-interview-part-2
Paul Murray’s take on it was; “Nothing that was suggesting he had done anything really bad”
If the reference in the email was Craig’s disqualification as a director (applied in 2000 for his actions in 1998) why did Paul Murray not appear to know about it?
Was the dossier “edited” before those outside the inner sanctum were allowed to view it?
Forres Dee (@ForresDee) says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 17:47
1 0 Rate This
allyjambo says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 17:19
It would mean TRFC can sign as many players as they like, during the transfer window, but as they can’t register them, they’ll be paying their wages but won’t be allowed to play them until the second half of next season. That is if the SFA/SFL stick to the rules…and they wouldn’t break the rules would they?
=================================
They can sign and register any ‘free agent’ after 1 Sep, I’m sure a signing on fee could be arranged to compensate any loss of earnings over the summer
___________________________________________________________
Yes they can. But they cannot sign a player to a “pre-contract agreement” and register them before the embargo ends.
The coverage suggests that they have signed pre-contracts.
zerotolerance1903 says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 18:14
Yes they can. But they cannot sign a player to a “pre-contract agreement” and register them before the embargo ends.
The coverage suggests that they have signed pre-contracts.
————————————————————————————-
Don’t know if you caught my earlier post, but an ‘agreement to sign’ is not necessarily the same as actually signing a formal “pre-contract agreement”.
Pure semantics and shows how the media use deliberately ‘loose’ language when writing these articles.
As I understand it.
Free agents can be registered at any time.
So Rangers cannot register these players during August, however once the registration embargo is over then they can register them.
That means they can register those players from September onwards. They can sign contracts or pre contracts at any time, but not play them until they are registered.
I get that. However, it alternatively means that all of TRFC’s “signings” are actually free agents until 1 Sept. I wonder if they realise this.
StevieBC says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 17:37
7 0 Rate This
A brutally honest post lifted from RM, from an apparently genuine TRFC fan with 600 posts to their name.
=========
It will not last long if we continue to pay Ally McCoist more than the combined wage of every manager in SFL2.
…………………………………………………………………….
Ally is actually paid more than the manager of Champion League finalists Borussia Dortmund….that is how bizarre the madness at Govan has reached!
Wouldn’t surprise me to see them all play as trialists, and claiming expenses as required. Three games can be played as a trialist and that is exactly the normal number of league fixtures in august. Not sure if Cup fixtures count towards that number or if they are separate!
paulmac2 says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 18:33
Did Mr McCoist not “TUPE” over meaning that he was entitled to at least the same terms. Same as the players who stayed, if they agreed to do that then they were entitled to the same terms and conditions. Even in the Scottish 4th tier.
HP, your post earlier about “Club” definitions and the LNS precident WRT to the troubles at Hearts and hopes of Dundee is quite worrying. What worries me is that since last summer, the failure of any “Club” to challenge what is going on, and in particular DAFC? WTF are they thinking. A relegation and points penalty that should never have happened, or am I reading you wrong.
As strong as my distaste is for the undoubedtly overpaid Mr McCoist, there’s no way he’s paid more than Jurgen Kloop. (2.1mil Euro’s p/a)
http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/the-rundown/top-30-best-paid-managers-180530845.html
I would be amazed if any of the players that sevco “sign” just now would be free agents at midnight 31/8 i.e. free to change their minds and sign for someone else
I would be more amazed if the SFA give a flying F
Hiruste Pursuit @ 18:07
http://www.scribd.com/doc/142055727/what-murray-knew
In this, there is a reference in the Takeover Panel Report to something that happened in 1998 – when Craig was “still in shorts”.
http://www.therangersstandard.co.uk/index.php/articles/current-affairs/204-paul-murray-the-rangers-standard-interview-part-2
Paul Murray’s take on it was; “Nothing that was suggesting he had done anything really bad”
If the reference in the email was Craig’s disqualification as a director (applied in 2000 for his actions in 1998) why did Paul Murray not appear to know about it?
Was the dossier “edited” before those outside the inner sanctum were allowed to view it?
—
From the TRS interview
Paul Murray confirmed that a report had been given to David Murray which, despite not explicitly making any serious allegations against Craig Whyte, painted a less than flattering picture.
“The report wasn’t commissioned by the board but by someone who had the club’s interests at heart. That was presented to Alastair Johnston round about March before the club was bought in May. It was shared with the rest of the board and was presented, by Martin Bain, to David Murray.
—-
So who commissioned the report ?
It suggests a perceived ally of the IBC (seekers of truth on CW)
Handed to ?
According to PM, it was AJ.
Meaning if it were to be doctored, it would have been before reaching AJ.
This wouldn´t have been a LexisNexis database search, more an investigative report, wouldn´t it ?
I have no issue with Rangers or any other club being able to register a free agent outside the window.
It means that someone who is out of work can get gainful employment. Allowing someone to ply their trade and earn a living must only be good surely.
http://m.local.stv.tv/edinburgh/news/225724-hearts-relegation-fate-to-be-decided-on-monday-following-ubig-insolvency/
Forres Dee (@ForresDee) says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 17:47
They can sign and register any ‘free agent’ after 1 Sep, I’m sure a signing on fee could be arranged to compensate any loss of earnings over the summer
________________________
But can someone already signed by 1st September be classed a free agent? Why have a rule that says pre-contract players must be signed and registered within the window then allow them to be registered after the window closes? I’m sure the ‘out of contract’ loophole is there purely for the benefit of players who have been unable to secure a contract within the window rather than clubs to get round registration embargos; but, I know, we’re not dealing with entities that stick to the rules, or at least we have an FA that tries it’s best to adjust the rules to suit the Ibrox club. But surely, at some time, they must come across a rule that can’t be adjusted, ignored or forgotten!
The CE says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 18:42
…………………………………………
I stand corrected CE…however I believe the report I came across was based on a basic salary…so I’m not sure that list on your link is solely a straight saary with no additionals….I’ll need to see if I can find what I previously came across…
monsieurbunny says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 18:50
I really have no interest in re-starting this refereeing nonsense. Particularly when the bloke who runs the blog has already asked for it to be stopped.
So fire away, just count me out.
Ally would have been paid more if he had got to the CL final, that’s that one settled. And we get a laugh as well.
allyjambo says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 18:51
2
0
Rate This
But surely, at some time, they must come across a rule that can’t be adjusted, ignored or forgotten!
___________________________________
Gravity.
(c.f. persisting absence of hover pitches)
chipm0nk says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 19:02
monsieurbunny says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 18:50
I really have no interest in re-starting this refereeing nonsense. Particularly when the bloke who runs the blog has already asked for it to be stopped.
So fire away, just count me out.
====================================
Your post is understandable but I wasn’t trying to restart anything. I left off viewing the blog after lunch and only got back to it this evening, then posted while in the middle of reading the earlier “refereeing nonsense”.
resin_lab_dog says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 19:22
allyjambo says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 18:51
But surely, at some time, they must come across a rule that can’t be adjusted, ignored or forgotten!
___________________________________
Gravity.
(c.f. persisting absence of hover pitches
====================================
Too tempting…
How about Sod’s Law ?
i.e. “…the future is looking rosy at Ibrox…” but then comes along an insolvency event ? 🙂
Just wondering.
There is talk of Hearts losing points because their owner is going into “administration” or “liquidation”. That could mean them either being relegated, or starting next season with minus points.
If Rangers are the same club (as we are told), and it was their “owner” which is being liquidated, how many points were the club docked for this event.
Or is the reality, as we all know, that it was a new club so any points deduction would be totally unfair.
.
zerotolerance1903 says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 15:18
“So, we’re saying that ticketus (as part of Octopus) has had a longer relationship with Whyte than has been public”.
———–
Still a bit behind the curve but the date on the e:mail (1st March) is just before Whyte buys Rangers, so I don’t see the date being significant. This Hassall geezer (Paul J Hassall) doesn’t work at Ticketus/Octopus. He’s in insurance according to the only Linkdin record googl found. It’s an unusual name so my hunch is this is the right guy. Fits a financial profile anyway though he’s provincial not city.
Perhaps ianjs (nice to see you ian, you’ve arrived at an opportune moment), can assist or verify if the Linkdin profile below fits the bill of someone who would be involved in such a deal and if so, what relevance this would have.
http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/paul-j-hassall-fcii-cemap/6/a91/25a
ianjs says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 15:06
Thanks for the documents ian. I’ve added them to my list of links. Similar with ZT, your advice will be welcome as (if and when) my reading of the information will be superficial whereas you will have the insight already.
The CE says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 18:42
3 2 Rate This
As strong as my distaste is for the undoubedtly overpaid Mr
McCoist, there’s no way he’s paid more than Jurgen Kloop. (2.1mil Euro’s p/a)
http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/the-rundown/top-30-best-paid-managers-180530845.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Not sure I understand your point. Has someone suggested he was? I’ve been dipping in and out, so apologies if I’ve missed it, but I’m not sure why anyone would think McCoist would be paid more than a Champions League finalist.
What the list highlights is the lunacy of the EPL. Ferguson, Wenger, Dalglish and Mancini I can understand. But David Moyes and Martin O’Neill above Hitzfeld and del Bosque? Hughes and McLeish on it at all?
I’m ignoring Maradona at Al-Wasl because that’s just silly.
Paul Hassall ran/runs the Wealth Management component of Merchant House Group, which Whyte is very closely linked to.
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 3m Someone was in the process of compiling Duff and Phelps info. Note Paul Clark is aware that it’s a 3 year ticket deal
http://www.scribd.com/doc/142089135/Duff-and-Phelps-Advice …
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 3m Within the next hour I should have uploaded the Sevco 5088 Letters and Share Purchase Agreements. Supporting documentation will also follow.
Charlottes awake on twitter.
scapaflow14 says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 16:01
Charlotte is busy
http://www.scribd.com/doc/142055727/what-murray-knew
——————
So that’s why Craig Whyte had Media House check his media history in August 2009. Perhaps there was an attempt at that point to erase some past knowledge. Unfortunately Alistair Johnson (I always felt he had some principle about him), unearthed a clue.
This obviously had ramifications for the deal being concocted.
Show’s MIH involvement from the outset (pre-purchase anyway). It has long been suspected but this is the closest to ‘proof’ so far. The fact that CW was changing history back in 2009 might provide an indicator of when the plot was initially hatched.
iamacant says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 19:52
I thought we were told that Paul Clark was OK to be an administrator as, albeit he was from the same firm, he was not involved in any way in Mr Whyte buying Rangers.
Did their first press conference not cover that issue.
Excuse my ignorance but in the email dated 19 April 2011 sent by Gary Withey, he starts it off by stating “James” yet the recipients appear to be Phil Betts, Craig Whyte and David Grier.
Who is James?
iamacant says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 19:52
0 0 Rate This
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 3m Someone was in the process of compiling Duff and Phelps info. Note Paul Clark is aware that it’s a 3 year ticket deal
http://www.scribd.com/doc/142089135/Duff-and-Phelps-Advice …
————————————————
So, MCR (Grier and Clark) provided assurances to Ticketus that their deal would survive insolvency
then D&P (Clark) breached that deal anyway
I think Ticketus might have a very strong complaint about the involvement of Clark in Whytes takeover and then being the administrator
looks like they have simply lied to a funder. (via CW)
Pretty sure CW could also pursue D&P for the quality of the advise given prior to takeover as he is now on the hook for the debt to ticketus
paulmac2 says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 16:11
“Sounds like Possil……Or my first visit to the Saracen head during a lunchbreak…”
———–
Time must be playing tricks with your memory Paul. The Saracen Head is at the Barra’s. There are a few pubs at Saracen Cross in Possil. Perhaps it was ‘The Brothers’?
David Grier
http://www.tma-uk.org/directory/profile_member.asp?ID=9932
Charlotte fakes latest offering, first mention of armageddon, at least we now know who the msm were referencing when using that term 🙂
The Sevco house of cards is in Danger,somebody just opened a window,and there’s a gale blowing.
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 20:11
I find that bit quite astonishing.
They seem to say that the claims would survive any insolvency event. That everyone is onside with that, and use that to help secure the funds from Ticketus.
However later they argue the point in the CoS and basically shaft Ticketus, making them an ordinary creditor by breaching the contract.
Honour amongst thieves, I think not.
Oh and I think any doubt whatsoever that they knew exactly what was going on, where the money was coming from etc would be totally negated if these latest revelations are genuine.
mullach says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 20:13
The Sarry Heid is indeed at the Barras.
The Saracen Bar is in Possil. Saracen Street strangely enough.
I wonder how our glorious journalistic spivologists (copyright) are going to spin this one along with the next batch of documents to be released tonight?
iamacant says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 20:30
0 0 Rate This
I wonder how our glorious journalistic spivologists (copyright) are going to spin this one along with the next batch of documents to be released tonight?
====================================
quite easily, they will do exactly what the SFA do…….ignore it
“i don’t read twitter”
” i don’t follow internet blogs written by anonymous people”
“I’m a useless jakey fud clinging onto a job”
NTHM, chipm0nk
david grier responds to claims that he had a “conflict of interest” in his role in Craig Whyte’s takeover of the club. 24/5/2012
http://m.local.stv.tv/glasgow/news/103109-interview-with-rangers-administrator-over-conflict-of-interest-claims/
iamacant says:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1pU7_1YJ7o
iamacant says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 19:52
0 0 Rate This
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 3m Someone was in the process of compiling Duff and Phelps info. Note Paul Clark is aware that it’s a 3 year ticket deal
http://www.scribd.com/doc/142089135/Duff-and-Phelps-Advice …
______________________________________________________________
Lots of observations on that. Looks like intent was to phoenix Rangers all along. Will post more later.
* (@enmac75) says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 20:34
Oh deary deary me.
The latest email explains why Ticketus had no security. Under EIS rules they are not permitted to offer loans, hence no requirement for a security.
I see CF is stirring the pot. Would particularly love to see the shifty beggars from Duff and Duffer get their just desserts. ‘Mon CF.
Iamacant @20:30.
In Keech Jackson’s case someone will need to explain it to him.
This latest stuff from Charlotte really puts the cat among the pidgeons– D&P in it up to their neck pre and post Administration– what will Paddy Hodge make of it all.
And can SDM maintain that he was duped and knew nothing?
easyJambo says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 20:43
However they believed that the pre-purchase of a right to occupy a seat at Ibrox survived administration.
It was only at the Court of Session it was pointed out that this was not the case under Scots law. That the contract could be breached and that made them an ordinary creditor.
Presumably that is why they decided to act against Whyte personally, re his lying about being a disqualified director.
paulmac2 says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 18:33
StevieBC says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 17:37
7 0 Rate This
A brutally honest post lifted from RM, from an apparently genuine TRFC fan with 600 posts to their name.
=========
It will not last long if we continue to pay Ally McCoist more than the combined wage of every manager in SFL2.
…………………………………………………………………….
Ally is actually paid more than the manager of Champion League finalists Borussia Dortmund….that is how bizarre the madness at Govan has reached!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You say it is bizarre and madness but this time last year when season ticket sales were almost non existant Ally was in the driving seat as regards future sales. Paying him what he asked for wasn’t an option but a vital business decision.
All these pilgrims have one consistency – they all `value` the supporters – funny that
We should stand for all Scottish Football Supporters agin this orchestrated spiv cash take onslaught
Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 20:45
Really just what we have been saying about D&P for some time being confirmed.
One wonders if there will be confirmation that their remit was to save “the business” rather than the PLC, as was their legal duty. Or to obtain the best result for the creditors, as is their next duty after they have failed to save the company.
In short, saving “Rangers” was all that ever mattered, whether by a CVA or keeping the assets together and selling them as a job lot. The creditors were never a factor.
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 20:34
7 0 Rate This
“I’m a useless jakey fud clinging onto a job”
——————–
Classic… nice one 🙂
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 20:11
2 0 Rate This
iamacant says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 19:52
0 0 Rate This
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 3m Someone was in the process of compiling Duff and Phelps info. Note Paul Clark is aware that it’s a 3 year ticket deal
http://www.scribd.com/doc/142089135/Duff-and-Phelps-Advice …
————————————————
So, MCR (Grier and Clark) provided assurances to Ticketus that their deal would survive insolvency
then D&P (Clark) breached that deal anyway
I think Ticketus might have a very strong complaint about the involvement of Clark in Whytes takeover and then being the administrator
looks like they have simply lied to a funder. (via CW)
Pretty sure CW could also pursue D&P for the quality of the advise given prior to takeover as he is now on the hook for the debt to ticketus
================================================
i vaguely remember someon on here covering the Duffers “breach” of the ticketus ‘deal’.
the part i remember was basically
… the duffers make a balls up = they forgot that the law in scotland differs from england.
these emails show they “did know” what they were doing regarding MBB/ticketus/SDM
yet it all fell apart when they found out about scots law being different
or
was that part of the scam too?
nostarsandbarred says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 20:58
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 20:34
“I’m a useless jakey fud clinging onto a job”
——————–
Classic… nice one
———————————————————————–
Gonna gie us a clue who this might be or are you pulling my leg? If you are, please leggo 🙂
chipm0nk says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 20:55
Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 20:45
Really just what we have been saying about D&P for some time being confirmed
_
Hang on – Didn’t you state the other day the choice of Administrators didn’t matter?
No offence made or taken – but a bit of consideration before jumping [twice] on someone – is better?
jimlarkin says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 21:01
i vaguely remember someon on here covering the Duffers “breach” of the ticketus ‘deal’.
the part i remember was basically
… the duffers make a balls up = they forgot that the law in scotland differs from england.
these emails show they “did know” what they were doing regarding MBB/ticketus/SDM
yet it all fell apart when they found out about scots law being different
or
was that part of the scam too?
=============================================
so, if you are Craig whyte paying them to confirm if the deal will survive insolvency or not – you expect them to get it right. No?
If you are ticketus and relying on their professional information before completing such a deal – you expect it to be right. No?
if you are D&P and you tell YOUR CLIENT one thing and then are the ones taking the exact opposite action against YOUR CLIENT – you don’t think this is a conflict for which you might be in some trouble?
So, if BDO and/or Lord Hodge become aware of CF’s latest release, what are the potential actions they can take against D&D and how might they affect RFC* now in a worst case and best case scenario?
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes now Grier in Jan 2011 aware of short term funding. A 3 year deal (see prev) implies much more significant amount.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/142101511/Quantum …
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 20:34
“I’m a useless jakey fud clinging onto a job”
————————————-
Surely it’s Jim Traynor, in a rare moment of clarity.
iamacant says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 20:09
Excuse my ignorance but in the email dated 19 April 2011 sent by Gary Withey, he starts it off by stating “James” yet the recipients appear to be Phil Betts, Craig Whyte and David Grier.
Who is James?
—————————————————————————-
Still bugging me, don’t know why
Much as I am enjoying this, and its great stuff, a bit of me is noting 2 things.
1. These are selective leaks. drip fed publicly.
2. Qui Bono.
Any legal heads with an opinion?
twopanda says:
Friday, May 17, 2013 at 21:09
If I remember correctly the context for that was that as far as a CVA being achieved, given the HMRC position, the choice of administrators didn’t matter.
That is true, and always has been.
HMRC rejected the CVA for various reasons, the administrator involved would not have changed any of those reasons.
Enjoy
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 3m
Letter and SPA attached re Sevco 5088 purchase. More to follow surrounding this offer. http://www.scribd.com/doc/142103828/Letter-and-SPA …
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 4m
Letter and SPA attached re Sevco 5088 purchase. More to follow surrounding this offer. http://www.scribd.com/doc/142103828/Letter-and-SPA …
Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 3m Letter and SPA attached re Sevco 5088 purchase. More to follow surrounding this offer.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/142103828/Letter-and-SPA …
Busy girl tonight
Well no – but you are a respected poster – and liked for all that – & 99 % correct! 😉