The Existence of Laws

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/

This entry was posted in General by Trisidium. Bookmark the permalink.

About Trisidium

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

5,802 thoughts on “The Existence of Laws


  1. i am back from barcelona and thank you caveat emptor for the tip.on where to see the game on sunday…
    enjoyed it very much but ended up in molly’s across the road from the temple bar…don’t ask!!!
    surprised at the route sevco are taking to cut costs…
    that is only signing players with wee surnames…
    law, bell, daly etc…
    every little counts and i suppose at £1 a letter on the back of the jerseys, it’s a start…
    i’ll get my coat…


  2. Allyjambo.@ 17.29. Good work getting that info onto the blog. Leaving aside the £20m for directors, the mind boggles that RFC(il) walked away from a possible £140m debt, and they think that they were hard done by and received “a kicking when we were down”. Hell mend them!!!!


  3. abigboydiditandranaway says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 18:15

    that is only signing players with wee surnames…
    law, bell, daly etc…

    ———–

    Wonder if that boy Tore Andre Flo is still kicking a ball ?


  4. ekt1m says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 18:41

    4

    0

    Rate This

    easyJambo says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 17:29

    11

    0

    Rate This

    ____________________________

    Probably explains the lack of concern over the £1m a month haemmorhage at Newco.
    I suppose once you’ve conditioned yourself to an entitlement to blow £140m of other peoples money for no net societal gain, you can probably reconcile yourself to burning through the odd million without reaching for the calculator. Just numbers on paper really. Doesn’t mean anything.
    I’m not really sure the required paradigm shift has happened yet down Govan way. And I think that is going to be a problem for somebody.


  5. Item 4 re the HMRC EBT appeal is interesting. They are reveiwing the papers and “reserving the company’s position”.

    Is it possible that Rangers(In Liquidation) won’t actually contest HMRC’s appeal. Has it been separated from the other appeals, and if so could Rangers lose by default.


  6. Who are the football creditors for 3.3m? Rapid Vienna? And wasn’t that all meant to be sorted before the membership was granted?


  7. chipm0nk says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 19:04
    ——————————————-
    No, you can’t lose at the UTT by default.

    The appellants in the appeal to the UTT, HMRC in this case, have to establish to the satisfaction of the UTT judge that the FTT’s findings were wrong in law.

    The defendants in the appeal, the liquidators of RFC(IL), have to make a decision whether it is in the interests of the creditors (HMRC) to instruct solicitors to make a defence against the appeal.


  8. Tallboy Poppy

    If you’re out there.

    I was doing a bit of ploughing and came across a link ianjs provided. It did not seem significant at the time but upon further scrutiny I get the impression it might be a useful resource if you are interested in company paper. It is from the Financial Services Authority website.

    Here’s the page I’m open at currently which I thought looked interesting, if you liked that sort of thing.

    http://www.fsa.gov.uk/register/firmPassports.do?sid=93204

    Heres the main page.

    http://www.fsa.gov.uk/register/firmBasicDetails.do?sid=93204

    If nothing else it will cure insomnia.


  9. According to Alex Thomson a letter before claim has been sent to RFC with 330 pages of evidence.

    That will be interesting.


  10. easyJambo says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 17:29

    Looking at the summarised list of Unsecured Creditors, there are £7M trade, creditors, £7.7M Debenture holders, £27.2M Ticketus, £3.3M football creditors, £94.4M to HMRC, but the most notable one was £20M to Directors. Is the £20M a claim by Dave King, or some other unrelated claim?
    =========================================================

    EJ – I have undernoted a post from an RM bondholder which I think illustrates the spiv mentality being shown towards Bears who have dug deep to support their club. What the poster wants is that he can renew his seat every year but that if say one year he can’t afford to then the club can sell it to someone else but he can still renew the following year. He also wanted to be able to leave the seat to his kid.

    These seem reasonable requests and it appears they were guaranteed under the original system. I think perhaps the Bears might start to understand there is a difference between oldco and newco and that, in turn, affects the club. Things are not continuing – they are different. It also seems the club is quite happy to accept the BDO position re debenture holders as it suits it financially.

    UNDERNOTE

    I’m a bond holder and I received an email from the club telling me basically this is the last season my seat will be kept for me,I never got involved in the creditor stuff ,I never wanted a penny from the club all I wanted was a guarantee my seat that I bought and paid for was mines for life.

    I phoned the club this afternoon to ask them to clarify were i stood in regards me still owning my seat and to my utter disgust the plonker I was dealing with from customer services had the cheek to tell me I bought the seat from the old co and the newco wasn’t honouring the deal,what the fuck my own club using old co newco shit. To say I’m offended at the club’s stance is an understatement. Why is the club not honouring the deal with bond holders?


  11. slimshady61 says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 19:56

    According to Alex Thomson a letter before claim has been sent to RFC with 330 pages of evidence. That will be interesting.
    ==================================================

    I have the feeling that the P&M legal advice will be that it has to be considered – I hear kerching from the legal cash register to the tune of at least an additional £100K 🙂

    And the Board may have to defer tomorrow’s vote of No Confidence in Malcolm.


  12. @abigboy…….
    Glad you enjoyed Barcelona. Meant to ask you to enquire in the Temple Bar if I was still barred!
    Have also enjoyed the charms of Molly’s hostelry.


  13. slimshady61 says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 19:49

    Thanks.

    Clearly HMRC will put their appeal forward, I take it from what you say that if the respondent does not put anything forward then the Tibunal will still sit, it will just consider the original evidence, along with HMRC’s appeal against the decision (or the relevant parts of it).

    So even if BDO choose not to spend creditor’s money on it there will still be a hearing.

    That makes sense.

    It is also a relief. If the UTT rule in favour of HMRC it will be a decision based on the facts of the case. Rather than just a rubber stamp due to a response not being funded.


  14. Bayviewgold says..
    You’re right, CWs SFA fine could also be described as a football debt, therefore both oldco and newco were / are liable and have agreed to such payments as a condition of joining the SFL.

    Strange therefore that the SFA have chosen to go to court for personal payment from CW, especially given CWs statement that he wont pay.

    Maybe not, given their reluctance to do anything against the interests of the deid club or the purchasers of some of its assets. As others have suggested, there appears to be little the newco will do that will attract censure or consequences from the SFA.


  15. Had to post this, no wonder they are truly fecked. billmcmurdo.wordpress.com.


  16. neepheid says:
    Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 10:48

    “There is absolutely no doubt that the 5 way agreement was signed off by all parties.”.
    —————

    I’m with you now neepheid. I speculated that because SL1 was not delivered then TRFC could repudiate the contract. However the draft had a clause covering such eventualities and requiring all signatories to be bound even if all the committments were not fulfilled. More widely, your analysis ticked all the boxes and I now consider myself better informed as a result.

    As an aside, in the definitions nothing appeared for the abbreviation FC. To quote :

    “FC” means [ ];

    Thats cleared up that particular controversy then.

    Thanks to borrussiabeefburger for providing the accessible format of the document


  17. Sorry,thought I had posted the link,but you have to read this mince.

    Delusional does not begin to describe this man,the real worry is that there may be people who believe him.


  18. Tonight would be a good night for CF to drop some new info. However, with the delivery of the proper LBA, I would suggest that CFs agenda wasn’t entirely successful, she has exited stage left and the panto has moved into the next act!

    I would love to be proved wrong though!


  19. Tic 6709 says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 20:58

    “Delusional does not begin to describe this man,the real worry is that there may be people who believe him”.

    http://www.billmcmurdo.wordpress.com
    ———–

    I read it. The Bears appear riven with division. McMurdo urging to follow the Vanguard Bears if you have ‘No Surrender’ running through your veins. Charles Green will, save us.

    For a more considred analysis please refer to the online version of The Beano.

    McMurdo might have a point but the way he is shouting it from the top of the ramparts is medieval. There is a quote, something like “a house divided will fall”.

    Looks as if all the seeds of self destruction have been sown and are now being liberally drenched in manure.


  20. Tic 6709 says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 20:53
    0 0 Rate This
    Had to post this, no wonder they are truly fecked. billmcmurdo.wordpress.com.

    Why are there pictures of (amongst others) Elvis Presley, Batman, The Pope, The Queen, Prince Charles, Vito Corleone, and – last, but not least – Eamonn Holmes on the background to his blog title?

    Although having read the blog, that’s not the maddest part of the page.


  21. @LawTop20: Is it true that there is another secret agreement, other than the 5-way agreement?

    So what’s Gregory on about then?


  22. Followed by..

    @LawTop20: Remember the golden rule of cross-exam: you never ask a question unless you know the answer to it…


  23. Could lady Charlotte’s recent silence be due to her putting in some nightshifts scanning 330 pages of material?

    Scottish football needs a strong Arbroath.


  24. Flocculent Apoidea says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 17:37
    28 3 Rate This
    I’m surprised at the discussion on the over-21 ruling. Am I the only one that remembers the serial “administrative errors” with player registrations made by the previous Rangers? Footballers have a reputation for not being the sharpest tools in the box so they may forget their dates of birth in their excitement. I’m sure the SFA will understand.
    ========
    It could happen to anyone !

    Campbell Ogilvie
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Campbell Ogilvie (born 1950 or 1951) is the President of the Scottish Football Association


  25. McMurdo’s Banner
    From right to left and top to bottom

    1.Barack Obama:? : P Charles : Don Corlieone: A.Ferguson: J. Knox: Big Ben:
    2.Eamond Holmes:? Martin McGuinness: Kitchener: A Salmond: Queen: N. Lennon:P. Margaret:
    3. Queen (again): The Pope: T. Sheridin : SFA: Batman: ?: K. Billy: Elvis:
    4. Poppy: A.McCoist: Red Hand: G. Best : M.Thatcher: Bible: Handshake/Celtic: ?:


  26. y4rmy says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 19:37

    Who are the football creditors for 3.3m? Rapid Vienna? And wasn’t that all meant to be sorted before the membership was granted?
    ——————————————————
    Was the deal not that membership would be granted on condition that all football debts were paid, as long as it was all tidied up at some point in the future, in due course, in the fullness of time, etc? Maybe the mention of Armageddon was the time scale by which it had to be sorted out.


  27. Captain Haddock says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 20:46

    Well the interesting part to me is that clause 97.3 specifically refers to “club” not company, Which in the SFA glossary gives the following definition : “club” means a football club playing Association Football in accordance with the provisions set
    out in Article 6

    So if they are having to pursue CW personally in court rather than simply tap into the 22M that the supposed continuing club have in the bank they are tacitly agreeing that these are different “clubs” and different “members” regardless of the corporate side. If the ethereal “club” had simply moved to Sevco Scotland then the SFA would have been allowed under their own articles to pursue TRFC for CW fine. So why aren’t they? would it not be easier and less expensive to simply ask the same “club” to pay up or be in breach of their membership. Stewart Regan – what say you?


  28. In addition to the 330 pages Alex Thompson adds

    alex thomson‏@alextomo2h
    QCs acting for CW team on no win no fee. Court action “absolutely inevitable” if no settlement am told.


  29. timtim says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 21:48

    Arbroath need a strong Bon Accord

    Limeade? or red cola?


  30. iki says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 21:43
    ‘…From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Campbell Ogilvie (born 1950 or 1951) is the President of the Scottish Football Association’
    —-
    For the avoidance of doubt, per Scotlandspeople: register of births shows RC Campbell b. 1950


  31. After all the whole ‘history’ defence is always around they are the same Rangers Football Club but apparently not when it comes to the SFA debt collection dept.


  32. Going by McMurdo’s comments ,this is a plea for someone to come forward and take the carcass away,he knows its over and has become delusional and cannot take anymore ,the decent rangers fans do not need to listen to this man ,the men in whyte coats have got to him.


  33. y4rmy says: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 19:37

    Who are the football creditors for 3.3m? Rapid Vienna? And wasn’t that all meant to be sorted before the membership was granted?
    ============================
    From the TRFC accounts to Dec 12:

    I am glad to report that, as of the date of this announcement, only £251,000 remains to be paid in relation to the £2.8m of football debts we undertook to pay in the SFA licensing agreement


  34. john clarke says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 22:33
    0 0 Rate This
    iki says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 21:43
    ‘…From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Campbell Ogilvie (born 1950 or 1951) is the President of the Scottish Football Association’
    —-
    For the avoidance of doubt, per Scotlandspeople: register of births shows RC Campbell b. 1950
    =======
    …. Sandy Bryson will have the last word on this.


  35. Campbell’s integrity obviously prevents him from taking part in the cabal.
    Either that or Bill forgot about him.


  36. Bayviewgold says.
    Well reasoned there, Bayview.
    It would seem to be the case that the authorities have taken the line that they could use a definition of new club / old club whenever it suited them, e.g.to keep the bears onside for fear of “social unrest”, etc, letting them keep the titles etc meaning it is the same club, or to make the only half decent decision they made i.e. following the lead of the SFL to put them into SFL3 for fear of a fans revolt, meaning it is a new club.

    Maybe they had half an eye on UEFA rules so fudging the new club / old club decision just enough to try to keep the perceived threats at bay, while also avoiding placing themselves in UEFAs sights if they didnt take any action.

    This might fit the mindset of a mix of decision makers who are variously conflicted, paid up Rangers fans, ambitious, sleekit yet cowardly administrators, timid chairmen & accountants, or otherwise unfit for purpose.

    We’re doomed, Capt Mainwairing, nothing will change until Sevco is bled so dry that there wont be a club for the administrators to save.


  37. easyJambo says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 22:35
    3 0 Rate This
    y4rmy says: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 19:37

    Who are the football creditors for 3.3m? Rapid Vienna? And wasn’t that all meant to be sorted before the membership was granted?

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

    They agreed to pay these debts as part of the 5 way agreement, and I understand that these debts were paid off in January/February this year, apart from £300k or so due to be paid in October. Just one of the reasons why they are now running out of cash.


  38. Charlotte Fakeovers ‏@CharlotteFakes 3m

    Reminder to Tom Stocker at PM, despite a promise to get back to me regarding evidence, I have heard nothing. He’s now on holiday till 3 June


  39. Captain Haddock says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 22:48

    I agree the fudging is deliberate but this is why all these discrepancies start to pile up and there are only so many fingers to go in the dyke, so if they are taking the difficult road by pursuing CW personally, the rational has to be that that “club” are dead. If they claim the club did not die then can an SFA member raise an action against the SFA for wasting funds on legal action that would not be needed if they simply asked the same “club” tp pay up, after all they are gloating about how much money they have to spend. I know I am going nowhere with this – but it would be nice for once for someone to ask these questions to the SFA. Or explain why my logic is wrong. (Logic and the SFA – there is a novel thought)


  40. …and she’s back!

    Charlotte Fakeovers ‏@CharlotteFakes 3m
    PM might want to check with Imran about the 28 June 2012 meeting/paper titled “Heads of Agreement – Sevco and PF Custodian” #AskImran


  41. Sorry, folks, I just noticed I got my Jambo’s mixed up. Apologies to Easy and Ally.


  42. Charlotte Fakeovers ‏@CharlotteFakes 4m

    PM might want to check with Imran about the 28 June 2012 meeting/paper titled “Heads of Agreement – Sevco and PF Custodian” #AskImran


  43. bayviewgold says:

    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 22:32
    Rate This

    Quantcast
    timtim says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 21:48

    Arbroath need a strong Bon Accord

    Limeade? or red cola?
    ==========================================================================

    Alpine ginger was better?


  44. I was just about to post to Bayviewgold on why I thought Charlotte had dried up. Worth another try I suppose.


  45. mullach says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 23:08

    Awww, you’ve got me intrigued now – any dafter theory than some of mine? 🙂


  46. I can’t find a ‘Heads of agreement document’ in her output but I have missed a few documents. I think a ‘landmine’ strategy might be underway. Whatever way the spiv’s step, she detonates the most proximate piece of material. I thought she was a nice well mannered woman but it may be that she has a vindictive streak. Remind you of anybody you know?


  47. bayviewgold says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 23:22

    “Private fund custodians”?
    ————-

    You nearly ticked my brain over to where it wanted to be with that suggestion.


  48. mullach says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 23:09
    0 0 Rate This
    PF custodians anyone?
    ===================================
    I’m guessing; but perhaps:
    “portfolio custodian” – looking after CW’s shares
    “private fund custodian” – looking after CW’s money
    “principal funds custodian” – looking after Ticketus’s money


  49. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heads_of_Agreement_%28law%29

    “A heads of agreement is a non-binding document outlining the main issues relevant to a tentative (partnership or other) agreement.[1] A heads of agreement document will only be enforceable when it is adopted into a parent contract and subsequently agreed upon. Until that point, a heads of agreement will not be legally binding”


  50. Alex:

    alex thomson ‏@alextomo 50s
    Rangers Letter Before Action listing tape-recordings; text messages: emails as well as usual company agreements in 333 pages of evidence


  51. alex thomson ‏@alextomo 1m
    Claims that Craig Whyte lost ” an opportunity to redeem his reputation by achieving a turnaround success at Rangers FC”…


  52. alex thomson ‏@alextomo 1m
    Which might raise some eyebrows..episode has “hindered his ability to conduct business activities in Scotland and/or elsewhere.”


  53. alex thomson ‏@alextomo 1m
    What matters is the effect – dismissed as a bluff? Prelude to major court action?


  54. bayviewgold says:

    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 22:33

    After all the whole ‘history’ defence is always around they are the same Rangers Football Club but apparently not when it comes to the SFA debt collection dept.

    ************

    And apparently not either when it applies to their debenture holders, who are now being told their deal is with the old co and not the new co, much to their chagrin….

    From RM

    I’m a bond holder and I received an email from the club telling me basically this is the last season my seat will be kept for me, I never got involved in the creditor stuff ,I never wanted a penny from the club all I wanted was a guarantee my seat that I bought and paid for was mines for life.

    I phoned the club this afternoon to ask them to clarify were i stood in regards me still owning my seat and to my utter disgust the plonker I was dealing with from customer services had the cheek to tell me I bought the seat from the old co and the newco wasn’t honouring the deal,what the eff my own club using old co newco shampoo. To say I’m offended at the club’s stance is an understatement. Why is the club not honouring the deal with bond holders?

    Email from ticket office

    With renewals approaching and some Bondholders still seeking confirmation, I am writing to provide you with further clarification on the status of the Rangers Debenture Bond as a result of previous changes to the legal ownership structure of the company. Whilst the bond you hold remains with RFC 2012 and the rights are non-binding under the new company, the Board has intimated that they would like Bondholders to continue to benefit from certain ticketing rights.

    This season Bondholders were given priority to purchase a season ticket on the seat(s) on which they held a bond and benefited from a priority sales period for non-season ticket games.

    The Board have agreed to extend those ticketing rights into next season as follows:

    – Until further notice, Bondholders will retain the right to purchase a ticket for every non season ticket home match during a priority sales period and will receive the same discount as season ticket holders. Please note that for operational reasons, the seat may not be the one on which a Bond was held.

    – For Bondholders who purchased a season ticket for season 2012/13 all season ticket rights will prevail next season and for so long as the season ticket is renewed – a renewal form will be sent out prior to the start of next season.

    – Bondholders who did not purchase a season ticket on their bond seat(s) this season will have one further opportunity to purchase a season ticket on their bond seat(s) for season 2013/14.

    If you would like to exercise your right to priority purchase you must contact Rangers Ticket Centre on 0871 702 1972 (calls costs 10p per minute plus network extras) with your Rangers Number and Bond seat details no later than Monday 17 June. Please note you will not be sent a renewal form, you must contact Rangers Ticket Centre. For seasons following, normal season ticket rights will prevail so long as the season ticket is renewed.

    If you have any questions regarding the above please contact the Rangers Ticket Centre on 0871 702 1972 (calls costs 10p per minute plus network extras), email ticketcentre@rangers.co.uk or in writing to Rangers Ticket Centre, Ibrox Stadium, 150 Edmiston Drive, Glasgow, G51 2XD.

    Thank you for your continued support.

    Yours sincerely,

    Susan Hannah
    Ticket Centre Manager


  55. ekt1m says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 22:59

    Sorry, folks, I just noticed I got my Jambo’s mixed up. Apologies to Easy and Ally.

    It’s “Easy” , “Ally” is the one at Greggs, sorry I’ll get my jaikit (apologies to the real ally jambo)


  56. I see that the latest Charlotte Fakes docs show Willow International Ltd as being located in Miami, Florida which would tie-in with her posting times which some have remarked on.


  57. Exiled Celt (@The_Exiled_Celt) says:
    Wednesday, May 29, 2013 at 03:21

    Rangers Then, Rangers Now, Rangers Forever (However for legal reasons we are obliged to point out that this is only when we say so and is not binding. If you have any problems with that then eff off down to your lawyer or citizens advice and good luck trying to get any money or services out of us that relates to the team you knew as Rangers in your youth)


  58. ecobhoy says:
    Wednesday, May 29, 2013 at 08:34

    really? who would have thought it? 🙂 the real question is – who is instructing/feeding (BTW – the language of the posts suggest he is scottish (or british )and is located in US EST. zip code unknown.


  59. From Tomo’s Blog

    “And it all boils to this, from Craig Whyte’s lawyers:

    “Our clients have instructed us to issue court proceedings on their behalf against the following Defendants:
    – Mr Ahmad and Mr Green for breach of contract and unjust enrichment
    – Mr Ahmad, Mr Stockbridge and Mr Green for conspiracy and deceit
    – Mr Ahmad and Mr Stockbridge for dishonest assistance
    – Mr Green for breach of trust, breach of fiduciary duty and for indemnity and/or
    restitution and/or an account of gains under s195 Companies Act 2006
    – RFCL for knowing receipt, unjust enrichment, indemnity and/or restitution and/or an account of gains under s195 Companies Act 2006 and for a declaration that it holds property on trust for Sevco 5088
    – Zeus for, inter alia, dishonest assistance, conspiracy and deceit
    – Rangers International for unjust enrichment, knowing receipt and a declaration that it hold any shares registered or to be registered in its name in Sevco 5088 on trust for the Principals”

Comments are closed.