The Immortality Project

The Immortality Project – or – Death and Denial – Guest Post by Humble Pie

Death has a tendency to put everything else into perspective.

My family recently suffered a bereavement. It wasn’t a sudden death but it was still far too quick and far too soon for any of us to get our heads around. As our loved one’s illness progressed, each of us, in our own way, began to prepare for the inevitable. In the end, whilst it was not unexpected, it was nevertheless very traumatic, for everyone concerned.

Grief is a strange and often debilitating set of emotions. Even now, a few months on, when the intense sadness and tears have given way (mostly) to disbelief, we still find it hard to fully comprehend what has happened. We might never completely ‘come to terms’ with that fact, however, we do accept that it DID happen, much as we all wish that it hadn’t.

Many of you will be familiar with the Kubler-Ross model of the five stages of grief; Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression and Acceptance. Well, I am aware of having experienced each of these stages over the last year, as well as a couple of others which I wasn’t prepared for (a lot of personal reflection, a little guilt and a not insignificant amount of pain).

It seems to me that the Rangers supporters have been purposefully ensnared in an interminable cycle of the first two stages of KR; alternating between the denial of the death of Rangers and anger at what they feel has been done to their beloved club then back again to denial. This, as any first year psychology student will tell you, is a very unhealthy state of mind which, if not addressed, can quickly lead to physiological and behavioural problems.

At its lowest level, for example, people throughout the ages have continued to set places at the dinner table for their long-dead loved ones. They know in their hearts that the person has died but are comforted by the familiarity of doing the same things that they have always done. However, in extreme cases people have even kept and maintained the actual cadavers of the deceased, dressed them, talked to them and watched TV with them, in a state of absolute denial.

In archaeology, accepting and recognising the inevitability of death through conducting ceremonial burial services is considered to be one of the very first signs of a civilised people. You see, grief is a uniquely human and cathartic process i.e. it can produce ‘a feeling of being cleansed emotionally, spiritually, or psychologically as a result of an intense emotional experience’.

In short, grief is ultimately a good thing which leads you through a series of natural psychological steps towards acknowledgement of an unalterable situation, allowing you to take stock, re-evaluate and start to move on with your own life in a positive way.

That is what should have happened with the fans of the old Rangers.

Instead, this ‘never-ending cycle of the undead’ was positively encouraged by those many unscrupulous individuals who saw a way of making a fast buck from maintaining the ‘Then, Now and Forever’ illusion. Worse still, this resurrection fantasy is being facilitated by the very people whom we have entrusted to stop this kind of thing from happening in the first place. If only the SFA or the MSM had told them the truth, they might have had a chance to actually face up to the situation.

Unfortunately, these two bodies were so complicit in Rangers demise, so right up to their necks in the brown smelly stuff, that they were too afraid to face the inevitable anger which would have rightly come their way. So, they made up grim fairy tales to feed to the bereaved souls about non-existent ‘holding companies’, the ethereal ‘club’ which transcends death and by suggesting that it is ‘all a matter of opinion’.

Ernest Becker, in his 1973 Pulitzer Prize winning book ‘The Denial of Death’, posits that “human civilization is no more than an elaborate, symbolic defence mechanism against the knowledge of our own mortality”. This fear of death acts as an emotional and intellectual response to our basic survival instincts.

‘By embarking on what Becker refers to as an ‘immortality project’, in which a person creates or becomes part of something which they feel will last forever, the person feels they too have become part of something eternal; something that will never die, compared to their physical body that will die one day’. When this ‘immortality project’ is threatened it leads inevitably to fear, depression, loss of identity and sense of purpose.

In that case, the initial reaction of the fans to the imminent demise of Rangers was entirely predictable and understandable. “No way, this can’t happen to us, we are the people”. However, as soon as the full realisation of their club’s inexorable slide into liquidation began to sink in, came the expected anger. But towards whom should their righteous wrath be directed?

“Who did this to us, who are these people?” they cried. “Not I”, said Sir Murray of the Mint, “for I was duped”, “Nor I”, said President Ogilvie, “for it was never my role”. “Nor I”, said Mr Smith, “for I never knew nothing or nothing”. “Not us”, squealed the media monkeys in unison, “for that’s what we were told”, “Nor us”, said the SPL “it was nothing to do with us”.

“Who then?, we demand to know who these people are”, howled the horrified hordes. “T’was the Whyte knight”, they all concurred, “he alone caused this calamity”. “And the bampots”, sneered the slimy slug. “And the taxman”, puffed the pundits. “And the unseen hand of Mr Lawwell”, whispered the bilious bears from the safety of their den.

There were even those who tried to warn them, not least Hugh Adam, Phil Mac and RTC but they didn’t want to know. Even when their very own Messrs Green and Traynor spelt out, in no uncertain terms, that liquidation meant the death of their club, still they chose wilful ignorance. The MSM, with access to the same information, encouraged them to keep their heads firmly ensconced, ostrich stylee, on the banks of that ironically blue and white river in Egypt. Which just goes to show ‘you can lead a lamb to knowledge but you can’t make it think’

The point though is that the Rangers fans have heard the truth and once you have heard something you cannot unhear it. Even if you reject it, even if you deny it, it gnaws away at the back of your mind, infecting your subconscious.

Almost a year ago, I posted the following on TSFM. http://theinternetbampot.wordpress.com/2012/09/ in which I postulated that the SFA were too frightened to say anything which might imply that The Rangers were a new club.

Looking back at that post, I am amazed at how little the landscape has changed.

A year on and it has become apparent that the corporate cancer that destroyed Rangers has continued to metastasize in its new host. Charlotte’s revelations may have shown us that the rabbit hole goes much deeper than we first suspected. However, in my humble opinion, the information provided has only succeeded in ‘poisoning the well’ and deflecting attention from the main culprits in this disaster. Layer upon layer of complexity has been added to an already opaque story and the majority of her utterances appear designed to engage the more enquiring minds on this forum and consume their excess mental energy.

I know that some people are bored with this ‘debate’ but, to my mind, the single most important step for the redemption of Scottish football is the fan’s acceptance that The Rangers, who currently ply their trade in the SPFL First Division, are a new club. Once they have accepted that then everything else that they perceive has happened to them will begin to make sense. They will see that rather than everyone having a fly kick at them when they were down, most were actually trying to help them. It will also dawn on them that the very people who have been telling them that there is an anti-Rangers conspiracy against them are actually the same ones who are screwing them over.

Rangers were not relegated to div 3, The Rangers applied as a new club and were granted entry into the bottom tier of Scottish football. They are not banned from European competition, merely ineligible as a new club without the requisite financial ‘history’. Any reference to ‘rulings’ from ECA, ASA, the BBC Trust and any internal or so-called ‘independent’ enquiries are completely irrelevant, as none of these bodies are the final arbiter in this case. Scots Law is clear that there is no distinction between club and company after incorporation, when the company dies the club dies with it. That is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact.

Sooner or later The Rangers fans are going to realise this fact and when they do, there will be hell to pay. Until they do, their new club can never become truly cleansed. Only then can they move on and only then can they join together with fans of other clubs to root out the real cancer at the heart of Scottish football.  That’s why the MSM and the SFA are still petrified to say anything. In the meantime the real creators of this disaster are sneakily positioning themselves further and further away from the scene of the crime.

I am sure the majority of us would happily accept a new Rangers, cleansed of its financial, emotional and supremacist baggage. A club that all decent Rangers fans could support without feeling any guilt about Rangers downfall or that they were being taken for mugs. The prospect of a new dawn in Scottish football, where sporting integrity took primacy and clubs lived within their means was very real. However, as usual the SFA couldn’t miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

The truth is that Scottish football is in the state it is in, not because Rangers died but because those with the power and mandate to effect the prognosis sat back and did nothing. I am sure that they believe that ‘time heals all wounds’ and that the longer this injustice is allowed to stand the more likely it will be accepted by the man in the street. No doubt the authorities feel it is in the national interest to ‘let sleeping dogs lie’. However I cannot accept this. I believe that it is vital that we are able to face up to reality so we can move on for the benefit of all football supporters.

Scottish football is at a crossroads right now, I think we all feel it. Rampant corruption has become so mainstream that many of our fellow supporters have began to accept this as the norm. However, it just doesn’t sit right with me and I suspect that many regular contributors and readers of this blog feel likewise.

We have quite lost our way and we live in a society which spends vast amounts of money paying people like Jack Irvine to ensure that we stay lost. The mainstream media treat us like little imbeciles and demand that we conform to their assumed ‘professional superiority’. The PR machine plays up to our stereotypes and feeds our fantasies while the poorest people pay to swallow their poisonous propaganda and relentless trivia.

So what can we do ? Clearly, battering out a few blog posts and strongly worded letters to the various authorities involved has been rewarded by the square root of FA.

How can we make this an opportunity for growth rather than contributing to the destruction of Scottish football ? It is not good enough to tear down a system unless we have a better system to replace it. However, I believe that it is not the system itself which is broken. It is that those charged with administering the system are hopelessly corrupted, hugely conflicted and unable to apply their rules without fear or favour.

By their incapacity and inaction (wilful or otherwise) the SFA have facilitated a motley crew of various spivs, chancers and con-artists to glean the last few meagre pickings from the bones of the emaciated loyal supporters of this new club purporting to be the once mighty Rangers. They have permitted these ne’er-do-wells to collectively appropriate many tens of millions of pounds from the Rangers fans, the creditors and the public purse. They have already allowed this corporate malignancy to spread to a new host, ‘The Rangers’, and the absence of ‘moral hazard’ makes it more likely that the disease will continue to spread.

Benjamin Franklin once said, “‘Nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.”

Someone else once said, “The wages of sin are death, but by the time taxes are taken out, it’s just sort of a tired feeling.”

I sense that we are all beginning to get tired of this. It is time to stand together, all football fans, face the facts and direct our anger against the officers of the SFA who have allowed this sham to develop into a catastrophe.

I have no doubt that my humble opinions expressed here will raise the ire of many deluded souls. However, I am comfortable in the knowledge that the only people who get mad at you for speaking the truth are those that are living a lie.

RIP Big Man.

 

3,959 thoughts on “The Immortality Project


  1. One positive outcome from the recent TRFC fans’ behaviour wrt Jim Spence – and the failure of their club to condemn the cowardly actions ?

    If / when admin2 strikes, there will be an awful lot of people who will be happy, [and not just CFC fans], and there will be an awful lot of people who will be very keen – and vigilant / vocal – to ensure that TRFC or TRFC v.2 does not receive any preferential treatment.

    TRFC doing what it does best, [and just like the previous club] : generating negative goodwill !


  2. TW says:
    September 12, 2013 at 4:12 pm

    Effectively a 3 match ban for betting on games Black played in. Can anyone give some perspective to this by saying any other player / managers who have been given 3 match bans and what their offences were?

    ————————————————-

    As a fan of American baseball, Ian Black’s three-match ban for betting offenses (which include betting AGAINST his own team!) is shocking.

    For perspective, consider the case of Pete Rose, the baseball player who played (1960s-1980s) in the most games ever, had the most at-bats ever and, most significantly, had the most hits ever. (Yes, I know, we’re mad for statistics in baseball.) Rose is one of the absolute all-time great players of the past 140 years of American baseball. Yet, just after his playing days, when he had turned manager, it was revealed that he had been betting on games–a major no-no in the sport. (Every locker room in the league has large signs posted which remind one and all that betting by players or officials of the sport is strictly prohibited.) Rose had even bet on his own team though there was never any evidence produced that showed he had ever bet AGAINST his team. The result: Rose received a lifetime ban against having anything to do with Major League Baseball. Despite Rose’s constant public campaign to have the punishment rescinded, the ban has remained enforced for more than two decades. At this point, it looks like Rose will go to his grave without ever seeing the ban lifted or ever having the honor befitting him by being elected to the Hall of Fame. The man is an absolute legend in the sport yet the league has repeatedly shown no signs of mercy towards him.

    In American baseball, the message is loud and clear: get caught gambling on the sport and be prepared to kiss your profession good bye.

    In Scottish football, the message is now equally loud and clear: get caught gambling on the sport (hell, even bet against your own team) and be prepared to receive the lightest wrist-slapping of your life. Just sit out a couple of games and be fined a few quid.

    The “punishment” meted out today hardly sounds like much of a deterrent. If anything, to football players (especially those on low wages) today’s announcement probably sounds like a blaring invitation for them to go ahead and earn some extra cash by betting against their own teams because any resulting penalty will be pathetically miniscule.


  3. newtz says: September 12, 2013 at 8:04 pm
    ecobhoy says: September 12, 2013 at 2:40 pm

    Magnificant summary ….. 🙂 😎
    ==============================================
    Hey you’re doing no bad yourself 😆

    Lot of great material there to think about and well worth mulling over.


  4. In the begining there was Debt. Forfieted debt. A Whyte knight. EBTs.Tax-cases.Mark Daly exposing truths.We have had the Administration, Liquidation, The rip offs, Spivs, Jackals, crooks, comedians. Charles Green,(for whom all descriptions are apt).
    Wev’e had Swally in various forms. Crawling, snivelling, playing the gallery, witch hunting, name calling. His “Tell us the names” was a new low, at that point in time.
    We had Charlotte. Who like every proud lady, walked into the Sunset after numerous refusals.
    Charities ripped off. Directors secretly filmed while intoxicated. Wev’e had Lies, half truths and dodgy statistics.
    Claim and counter claim, too many kangaroo companies to mention. Walter walking away. Minty’s silence. A Governing Body acting like a paid policeman.
    And so much more,
    my head is sore.
    A betting scandal.
    Now a guy like Jim Spence threatened in the street whilst walking with his family. Camel, straw back.
    Somebody mentioned it previously. Boycott them, their Sponsors, their matches , home and away.

    Oh I nearly forgot ……….Dignity. According to Sevco , they have Dignity.


  5. Some people talking of fans sending a message to the SFA with a boycott or some sort of mass protest.

    I think the most effective example i’ve seen in recent years was the spanish example where fans threw thousands of tennis balls onto the pitch moments before kick off of a live TV match.

    This delayed the kick off and left the TV company with something they couldn’t ignore.

    Something similar at a future Scotland game might be the way to go – but the game has to be televised for maximum effect.


  6. I’ve just noticed an STV twitter account yet again stating the football authorities (SFA, UEFA, FIFA) all recognise Rangers as the same club. Isn’t it rather odd in the extreme that not one official statement from any of these organisations has made it into the public domain? After all, if the media know, they are in poll position to tell everyone else.


  7. Matty Roth says:
    September 12, 2013 at 10:05 pm
    ==============================
    Let’s just say Aberdeen were playing Celtic in the next Scottish Cup Final. It would surely be easy enough to organise a protest between both sets of fans that would be live on TV and really make a point. Or am I looking at things too simply?


  8. Sportsound was pathetic tonight. The two panelists who would give it ‘its only a wee flutter’ line were wheeled out….Tam Cowan and Chick Young. Both dismissed the charges outright and Chick even questioned the need for a 3 match ban…..10 suspended is surely enough! Neither of them played, managed or coached, I wonder what Willie Miller (IMO the most formidable presence on the programme by some distance) would have made of a team mate nipping to the bookies to back this weeks opponents?

    There is an important point here, people wonder why the game in Scotland struggles in the international arena at club and national level…well here is another example of p*ss poor professionalism, widespread?perhaps, but our national association all but endorsed this behaviour with their judgment today, another low as the SFA race to the bottom on almost every call.

    On a positive note, big thanks to echobhoy, how do you do it? Collate all that information and lay it out so that even I can follow it! Cap doft!


  9. Today’s SFA statement was prety unequivocal. Same club.


  10. Shocking what happened to Jim Spence today but sadly not unexpected. This is what they do if they hear what they do not want to hear. I want this incident to get massive media coverage to highlight the reason this happened. Sevco and their fans cannot handle the truth. Scotland cannot speak the truth. Shameful.
    Ian Black sham, Mr Young repeatedly stated it was not match fixing. What is your point chic. Betting on football as a player is illegal. Betting against your own team is s disgrace. Over to you Ally. Oh forgot SFA shameful yet again, dead men walking thanks to a dead club.


  11. arabest1 says:
    September 12, 2013 at 10:12 pm
    =================================
    Chick Young is and always will be a complete insult to TV licence fee payers. I think you are a wee bit sore on Tam Cowan though. He called Rangers out tonight and regularly asked what punishment THEY would apply to Black, especially given their punitive treatment of Sandaza. Going back to Chick Young though, why does a publicly funded broadcaster grant a platform to an apologist for an organisation that deliberately denied the public purse millions of pounds?


  12. upthehoops says:
    September 12, 2013 at 10:10 pm
    0 0 Rate This

    Matty Roth says:
    September 12, 2013 at 10:05 pm
    ==============================
    Let’s just say Aberdeen were playing Celtic in the next Scottish Cup Final. It would surely be easy enough to organise a protest between both sets of fans that would be live on TV and really make a point. Or am I looking at things too simply?

    ——————————————————

    I think its quite do-able if the right approach is taken to garner support from the fans.

    There’s a Scotland friendly planned in November I think.


  13. Today’s SFA statement was prety unequivocal. Same club.

    Which SFA statement was that?


  14. Ecobhoy
    Newtz

    Anyone.

    Regardless of whether CW takes Sevco Scotland/RIFC to court or manages an out of court payoff to go away, do you think there is enough evidence that Green has committed fraud and either the police or BDO or both need to do the job you two guys are doing for them?

    The consequences of any fraudulent activity may be unclear but if a crime has taken place it surely has to be investigated?

    Does someone with authority (Proc Fisc) not have a responsibility to go to the police and do the police have to wait for such an approach?


  15. upthehoops says:
    September 12, 2013 at 10:19 pm
    1 0 Rate This

    arabest1 says:
    September 12, 2013 at 10:12 pm
    =================================
    Chick Young is and always will be a complete insult to TV licence fee payers. I think you are a wee bit sore on Tam Cowan though. He called Rangers out tonight and regularly asked what punishment THEY would apply to Black, especially given their punitive treatment of Sandaza. Going back to Chick Young though, why does a publicly funded broadcaster grant a platform to an apologist for an organisation that deliberately denied the public purse millions of pounds?
    —————————————————————
    Maybe so UTH….but I thought the way 150+ offences, clearly against the rules were dismissed, and the act of betting in games which he played is only a matter for Sevco or the teams he was playing for at the time? Not for me. Betting scandals are pure poison and the national association should come down hard on offenders…not chase players out the game, but to categorise so many offences in clear material breach of laws, as equivalent to an adrenalin fuelled swear or adrenalin fuelled flick of the boot during game time is astonishing (or not :wink:) and I felt Tam was less than convincing in identifying the seriousness of this ruling.


  16. The statement that betting against your team on three occasions equates to a three match ban.
    Does anyone really believe this wouldve been the outcome for an ICT or hearts player.
    I’d love to hear Ladbrokes & Hills thoughts on this latest shambles.
    Fear of Allys list won the day.


  17. Been away for a couple of weeks to find no good news on return.
    In my inbox a ‘Well survey which gets to page 4 or near on which it asks do you fear going into admin “like Hearts Dunfermline and (FFS)Rangers”
    All ‘well fans on here its a large options box at the bottom of the survey. fill your boots.
    Mine will stand out without belabouring the obvious.


  18. TRFC fans threaten / intimidate a journalist and a former major shareholder / CEO – and still no mention or condemnation on the TRFC website.

    But a TRFC player receives an unusually lenient punishment for betting over a prolonged period – and this is ‘noted’ on the TRFC website.
    No mention that TRFC as a club respects the rules of the game and will ensure their players are fully aware of their responsibilities wrt betting.
    ============================================================
    “…Mr Whyte was subjected to catcalls and threats from a number of Rangers supporters at Inverness Sheriff Court.
    Many fans blame him for the club’s descent into administration.
    Mr Whyte was given a police escort from the building…”

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-24068989


  19. auchinstarry says:
    September 12, 2013 at 10:00 pm

    Boycott them, their Sponsors, their matches , home and away.
    ==========================================

    Apologies to Red Lichtie, but that’s what should end all of our comments.

    Boycott them, their Sponsors, their matches , home and away.


  20. This was always on the cards. They will be back 27th. will the plod do anything. I would expect the court to have words.


  21. However the court case they wont be at will be in OCT/NOV in London Collyer Brystow and all. I feel a week in London examining something work related coming on.
    Will CB newly re insured walk away. Opinions please?


  22. http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/TCC/2013/B6.pdf

    4. One of the Murray Group companies was Rangers Football Club plc (“RFC”), whose financial stability was known to be threatened by (among other things) tax debts, or at least claimed tax debts. As is well known, RFC collapsed into administration in March 2012, followed by liquidation in October 2012. It has been re-named RFC 2012 plc. The greater part of its business, and with it most of its assets, were purchased from the administrators in June 2012 by Sevco Scotland Ltd, which has since been re-named The Rangers Football Club Ltd. Although the professional football team known as Rangers had played in the Scottish Premier League until 2012, the collapse led to the ejection of the team from that league, and a team known as Rangers now plays in the Scottish Third Division.

    27. Before coming to the detail of the case it is worth making a preliminary observation. I have referred above to the strong feelings of many football supporters. Perhaps because of such feelings, professional football clubs are often regarded as having a special status. In some respects that may be the correct view; but it should nevertheless not be overlooked that a modern professional football club is not a “club”, in the sense of an unincorporated association of members who join together in pursuit of a common purpose, but a commercial enterprise whose function is to generate profits for its shareholders.

    “Although the professional football team known as Rangers had played in the Scottish Premier League until 2012, the collapse led to the ejection of the team from that league, and a team known as Rangers now plays in the Scottish Third Division.”

    “… a modern professional football club is not a “club”, in the sense of an unincorporated association of members who join together in pursuit of a common purpose, but a commercial enterprise whose function is to generate profits for its shareholders.”

    An absolutely serious point. Does the BBC trust decision – which effectively silences any “alternative” views on the matter – allow the Tribunal Judge’s comments to be reported?

    Surely his statements go against the enforced BBC’policy? Perhaps that’s why the BBC has not reported them.


  23. bad capt madman@ 9:33
    Rene Descartes would be proud. Sevco: I think We were,therefore We might have been. …mibbe?


  24. Hirsute Pursuite @ 11.44pm. It took a wee while to get through Judge Bishopp’s tome on the upcoming UTT appeal, but the fact that he resolutely opposed hearing the appeal in private is good news, stating that everyone had worked who was who re the colours so it will be a public hearing, the downside being that he felt that MIH could have a possible further appeal or appeals if the case went against them, but the same applies to HMRC. Well worth a read for our legals on here.


  25. A straight line drawn between Glasgow & Edinburgh,
    and then extended east across the North Sea
    that same straight line will pass through the town of Aalborg in northern Denmark.
    Aalborg appears to be a very nice place indeed.

    In contrast,
    A timeline drawn from Feb 14th 2012, RFC Administration day,
    to this day, passing through every twist and turn of the RFC/Sevco saga
    and then, continuing in the same vein, extended into the forseeable future,
    that same timeline cannot – I say again, cannot – end up in a nice place.

    Or, to put it another way,
    There is no future in Scottish Football worth having
    If Sevco, the SFA, the MSM & the Establishment behind them
    continue with their plan to put a team in blue
    at the top of the SPFL.
    And Planet Fitba’ here in Scotland would not be a very nice place.

    The Ian Black betting result is a chilling reminder of that.


  26. Ian Black admitted the charges of betting against his team three times, betting a further seven times on his own team and a further 147 bets. He has been banned for three matches.
    Would a bookie report a loser? I’ve heard of a bookie refusing to pay out as a result of ‘palpable error’ ( Shaktar Karagandy were quoted (by Corals) @ 9-1 to qualify for the group stages AFTER the 2-0 home result against Celtic, this was changed to 4-6 after a flood of money). I’ve never heard of a bookie refusing to accept a mug’s cash, quite the opposite!
    Was IB cleaning the bookie’s clock?
    How many of the three ‘bet against’ games were also bet as draws?


  27. helpmaboab says:
    September 13, 2013 at 12:16 am
    ########
    ‘I think therefore I’m overqualified for the MSM’


  28. Danish Pastry says:
    September 12, 2013 at 8:51 pm
    This just popped up as a retweet on my twitter. Insult to injury?
    ———-
    RangersMedia News
    @RangersMedia
    Fifty six journalists murdered in Russia since 1992. One Scottish football reporter heckled in the street #bitofperspectivepleasejim
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    —————————–
    Philippines is well known for being one of the most dangerous countries in the world to be a journalist. 73 murdered since ’92 and laws which allow journalists to be jailed pending trial if another party is upset by their reporting (whether true or not – Sevco would love that).

    Philippines is however a 3rd world Banana republic, where journalists, for the most part write and say what they are paid and told to say…

    …is that what Scotland is striving to become, because, it seems we’ve already successfully completed the second part?


  29. Good Morning.

    Ask yourself this question.

    Charles Green has always said that he acts on behalf of and with a consortium.

    At any given time, who was in that consortium?

    Who was in the consortium as at 12 May 2012?

    Who was in his consortium as at the day of the share placing?

    Who did Charles Green tell the SFA and SFL was in his consortium and who did the prospectus say was part of the consortium that brought the RIFC offer to the market?

    Oh and another thing:

    In any licensing process, you have to be declared to be a fit and proper person. You are not automatically presumed to be a fit and proper person, and instead the licensing body have to look at each candidate on their merits, carry out checks and enquiries, seek guidance from independent parties such as the police, and then on the basis of that information they effectively DECLARE that someone is a fit and proper person to hold a licence.

    The history of Licencing law in Scotland makes this plain.

    It is a bit like getting married, the person who is legally entitled to perform a wedding ceremony, DECLARES the couple man and wife AFTER they have performed the ceremony and the public have had the right to object or have their say, and the person carrying out the wedding has satisfied himself or herself that the couple are legally capable of getting married and that there is no legal impairment to their assuming married status in the eyes of the law.

    So, who have been declared as the fit and proper persons to run the current Rangers Football Club?

    Green? — He is no longer there but given that he has been proven to tell so many untruths, you have to question whether he would pass the test?

    Malcolm Murray who was roped in as the face of respectability? — Gone.

    Walter Smith — Gone.

    Who?

    The existing Directors are not major stakeholders, have no great track record in football and so on.

    Many of the shareholders are listed as mysterious off shore companies who are controlled by…….. well we don’t know.

    Zeus, Ahmad, Richard Hughes etc are all short term commercial funders– get in and get out with profit merchants– no more no less.

    So who from the consortium is left? Whose names are the only names that ever seem to have appeared on any official paperwork lodged anywhere and signed off by Charles Green?

    Maybe the RIFC annual return will tell us when we get to see it — if we ever do.

    Off course all of this may well be forgotten altogether if some form of cataclysmic event was to befall the company or any of the subsidiary or associated companies, but such an event would beg a question:

    Someone was granted a licence to play football, and someone was granted associated membership of the SFA.

    Just who was that membership and licence granted to?


  30. Quck question for anyone who knows the answer. When was the last time any club from Ibrox filed fully audited accounts?


  31. Who in their right mind would sponsor anything to do with the SFA these days? What kind of product or service could possibly be boosted by such a tie in? And to pay for the privilege?


  32. stevensanph says:
    September 13, 2013 at 1:54 am

    Philippines is however a 3rd world Banana republic, where journalists, for the most part write and say what they are paid and told to say … is that what Scotland is striving to become, because, it seems we’ve already successfully completed the second part?
    ————

    The lack of civil courage among Jim Spence’s collegues is shameful. We expected nothing less from the Chris Graham’s of this world, but that so few in the press will confront the bully boys and thugs in print, and on air, is sad. The message from the British quintessential seems to be it’s all Jim’s fault 🙄

    @manandboy
    Yes, you were perhaps in Aalborg recently. Living in a country where the sports press is not in the thrall of one single club and its mindset is normal here.

    Viva Jim Spence! Viva Dinamarca!


  33. Danish Pastry says:
    September 13, 2013 at 7:20 am
    0 0 Rate This
    The lack of civil courage among Jim Spence’s colleagues is shameful. We expected nothing less from the Chris Graham’s of this world
    ================================
    Worse still, a look at Graham’s Twitter timeline will show you some of Jim Spence’s colleagues positively engage with him and his friends. You will not find such cosiness, anywhere, between the media and anyone from any other club’s blogosphere.


  34. I keep seeing comments about the BBC not supporting Jim Spence but this is the tweet from the NUJ rep who was involved with Spence at the sharp end.

    paul holleran‏@paulholleran1 10 Sep
    @AngelaHaggerty @Pmacgiollabhain no u-turn required. I believe BBCScotland have always been prepared to defend Jim and all their journalists.

    So is he speaking the truth or being sarcastic?


  35. upthehoops says:
    September 13, 2013 at 6:04 am

    Quck question for anyone who knows the answer. When was the last time any club from Ibrox filed fully audited accounts?
    ———————————————————————————————-
    I’ll check with my grandad but his memory isn’t that great these days.


  36. A player is accused of betting against his team, the allegation contains the rider that the player is not accused of attempting to influence the outcome. This implies that a thorough investigation had been carried out BEFORE the charges were put to I B.
    Luckily for IB a stramash kicked off around Jim Spence, this had a twofold impact:
    The public were distracted by the venomous outpourings of influential sevco bloggers clogging twitter with bile.
    The members of the MSM were left in no doubt of the consequences to themselves of not following the party line from Govan I.e. ‘…they’re all doing it’. ‘….it was a harmless flutter’; ‘he wasn’t playing in the games he bet against’ ; ‘sevco have been punished enough’

    Anyone else see the cold, clammy hand of P R slime it’s way across the various MSM outlets?


  37. broganrogantrevinoandhogan says:
    September 13, 2013 at 4:16 am

    Ask yourself this question. Charles Green has always said that he acts on behalf of and with a consortium. At any given time, who was in that consortium?

    Who was in the consortium as at 12 May 2012? Who was in his consortium as at the day of the share placing?

    Who did Charles Green tell the SFA and SFL was in his consortium and who did the prospectus say was part of the consortium that brought the RIFC offer to the market?
    ===================================================================
    The problem is that we have always only had Green’s word about who was an investor and he was very careful with not fully revealing these. In his laughable STV unravelling just before he was forced to walk away in April this year he made the ludicrous claim that it was all in the public record which it isn’t.

    However the CF released minutes of the TRFCL board meeting gives us at lease the ‘official’ line as to who the investors were up until flotation. But as far as I can determine these were only the investors who were promised Sevco 5088, Sevco Scotland and TRFCL shares. I believe other investors had no interest in shares and put cash in and wanted cash + interest out and I assume they had some kind of property-backed debenture as security.

    However many of the consortium placees are anonymous overseas trusts and companies so knowing the name means nothing. I strarted looking at the ‘original placees’ the other night and immediately rant into a problem with Putney Holdings Ltd an ATP Investment Ltd – I just don’t know and a quick look on CH failed to spot them so I’ll need to go back and try harder. Although the latter might be connected to the ATPI group although that might just be a similar name.

    That’s why the overdue Annual Returns for Sevco Scotland and TRFCL are important IMO as the info there will be OFFICIAL and any errors or missing names can be pounced on 👿


  38. The Black betting thing – Have I missed something, or did he break the rules?
    All I’ve heard is ‘All players have a flutter’. Really? Well since most people do it, why don’t we revoke it then, eh? Nevermind the detrimental effect on our game of allowing unchecked betting on it by the people involved – since ‘all players have a flutter’ then lets let them get on with it.

    In reality, the SFA should be demanding Ally’s list of wrongdoers and the evidence (assuming it exists, and if it doesn’t, punish him for bringing the game into disrepute), and punishing them – if they’ve had a bet on games, then they’ve broken the rules. What they SHOULD NOT be doing is saying nothing and charging Black alone, as this just allows Ally to ferment the ‘They’re all pure against us, by the way’ myth that’s lead to , amongst other things, the treatment of Jim Spence.

    BTW Not to defend Romanov, but wasn’t he charged by the SFA for saying stuff a lot less serious than McCoist and Green?


  39. Paul Holleran of the NUJ says they “…do not condone…” the treatment Jim Spence has been getting. This is not exactly shoulder to shoulder stand beside you support. On behalf of his members he needs to issue an unequivocal and strong condemnation of the criminal behaviour JS is suffering.


  40. ecobhoy says:
    September 13, 2013 at 8:19 am

    5

    0

    Rate This

    HirsutePursuit says:
    September 12, 2013 at 11:44 pm

    http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/TCC/2013/B6.pdf
    ===============================================

    Well spotted what a pleasant way to start the day – sitting with my tea and toast and a very interesting read 😀
    —————————————————-
    That’s a pretty interesting document, even for those of us without a degree in legalese. But no sooner had I started reading than the threats appeared. And those threats have apparently come from ‘both sides’, so to speak. That sounds a bit odd, to my ears at least, but the learned gentleman must know what he was talking about, or at least what he was told. From page 4:

    ———————–

    “It is undisputed that various threats of a serious nature have been made, and that the Strathclyde Police have been compelled to offer advice and protection to several individuals involved in RFC’s affairs. Some of the threats have come from disappointed Rangers supporters; others from supporters of rival teams who have formed the opinion that RFC’s use of the EBT gave it an unfair financial advantage.

    “6.
    Largely because of those threats the hearing before the First-tier Tribunal was held in private. Some of the witnesses who gave oral evidence were resident outside the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom courts and tribunals, and therefore could not be compelled to give evidence; they did so only on condition that their names were not revealed.

    “The two HMRC officers who had dealt with the matter, too, were believed to be under threat and their identities were concealed. In consequence the decision was released in a heavily redacted and anonymised form. There was also a long interval between the conclusion of the hearing and the release of the decision, occasioned in part by the complicated nature of the issues and in part by the fact that the tribunal was not unanimous — the panel members spent some time in discussions in the hope of achieving agreement and when it became clear that would not be possible the dissenting member wrote a lengthy decision of her own, necessarily taking time to do so.

    “Those factors led to a suspicion in some quarters that material which could and should have been in the public domain was being concealed for inappropriate reasons. I do not accept that there is any substance in the suspicion, but I am conscious that there is disquiet and I am of the firm view
    that nothing should be done which might aggravate it without compelling reason.”


  41. wottpi says:
    September 13, 2013 at 7:32 am

    Compare and contrast
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1201362/Four-footballers-handed-bans-FA-acts-tough-betting-scandal.html
    ——
    For anyone who can’t be bothered to click wottpi’s link …

    Disciplinary chiefs have expressed ‘serious concerns’ that a League Two match may have been fixed after several players were banned for betting on the outcome.

    The four men have been suspended and fined after betting on the outcome of the League Two match between Accrington and Bury on May 3, 2008.

    Three of the players were with Stanley at the time and the other at Bury, who won the game 2-0.

    Jay Harris has been banned for a year and fined a total of £5,500 by an independent FA regulatory commission.

    David Mannix has been given a 10-month ban and fined £4,000.

    Robert Williams was suspended for eight months and fined £3,500.

    Andrew Mangan, who was then a Bury player, has been banned for five months and fined £2,000 for betting on his team to win.

    Nicholas Stewart QC, chairman of the regulatory commission, said: ‘The regulatory commission have serious concerns that the outcome of the match may have been fixed although none of the players were charged with these offences.’
    (continues)

    Mr Black’s punishment stands in stark contrast to the sanctions handed down to these players.

    Truly, Rangers and its players must have been punished enough already – nowadays they seem to be able to get away with just about anything.

    This really is a bloody disgrace.

    (I do not support Celtic.)


  42. Well today is D-Day and also Friday the 13th 😆

    3. The parties shall, by 13 September 2013, send to the Upper Tribunal and
    each other their estimates of the time required for the hearing of the appeal
    together with particulars of the dates inconvenient to them in
    the period from 6 January to 31 March 2014 inclusive

    The hearing is going to be a lot sooner than anticipated ❗


  43. Even if a player bets on his team to win 5-0, he’s betting Against his team winning 6-0.
    Do you want that guy taking the last minute penalty, with the score at 5 nil ? And what about 6 months down the line when the League is decided on goal difference.
    The slightest hint that this could happen is why its such a serious offence, not a slap on the wrist misdemeanour.


  44. In what has been another predictably unsatisfactory week in the history and politics of all matters relating to the Govan ‘institution’ I look forward to the only articulate and intelligent broadcast on our game,Off the Ball
    Saturday morning will come as a breath of fresh air to me.

    Over to you messrs Cosgrove and Cowan.
    Take on the bullies in the playground.Enough is enough!


  45. “Although the professional football team known as Rangers had played in the Scottish Premier League until 2012, the collapse led to the ejection of the team from that league, and a team known as Rangers now plays in the Scottish Third Division.”

    Colin Bishopp
    Upper Tribunal Judge
    President, First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber)
    Release date: 9 August 2013


  46. Jagsman says:
    September 11, 2013 at 9:24 pm
    38 10 i
    Rate This

    I see it in a different light:

    For someone alleged to be a Rangers fan, Donnelly spends a lot of time helping Clyde FC.

    But then as I am a Thistle fan, I have no problem believing that people from Glasgow don’t necessarily support one of the cheeks.

    http://www.cumbernauld-news.co.uk/sport/launch-of-clyde-supporters-trust-1-355156

    http://www.rutherglenreformer.co.uk/rutherglen-sport/local-rutherglen-sport/2012/05/23/football-clyde-fc-golf-day-riases-10-000-63227-31024470/

    https://www.facebook.com/clydefootballclub/posts/560323280666364
    ————————————————————–

    Fair enough, you present some compelling evidence that Dougie Donnelly has backed up his talk with some action, whilst being a regular at the Ibrox directors box but by coincidence hardly having set foot in Celtic Park other than in a professional capacity. Talk is easy.

    However rather than berate fans of “the cheeks” as you put it, in a holier-than-thou manner for our narrow-minded, b1goted mindset, your ire would be better placed at the likes of Chick Young, Bill Leckie and Jim Traynor who choose to disguise their true loyalties in the guise of masquerading as impartial commentators. They do more than any so-called petty mindset to let all the genuine journos down.


  47. As fans how many people have had a wee flutter on the football fixed odds coupons? More importantly how many have bet against their own team?
    Me NEVER.


  48. Tif Finn says:
    September 13, 2013 at 9:49 am

    “Although the professional football team known as Rangers had played in the Scottish Premier League until 2012, the collapse led to the ejection of the team from that league, and a team known as Rangers now plays in the Scottish Third Division.”

    Colin Bishopp
    Upper Tribunal Judge
    President, First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber)
    Release date: 9 August 2013
    ==============
    I’ve got to this bit:

    19. Although the second sentence of that paragraph proved to be correct, the third did
    not. The findings of fact set out at para 103 of the majority’s decision were drawn almost
    entirely from a statement of agreed facts prepared by the parties or were otherwise
    undisputed; there was very little analysis of (or comment on) the disputed evidence, and
    no findings based upon it. The majority simply failed in its duty to make findings from
    disputed evidence. One was left with the impression that, since HMRC did not rely on an
    allegation of sham, the majority took every document at face value and did not ask itself
    what was the true purpose of the arrangements. HMRC’s submissions on that point were
    recited but not addressed.


  49. Another interesting bit regarding his views on “Clubs”
    ==============

    27. Before coming to the detail of the case it is worth making a preliminary
    observation. I have referred above to the strong feelings of many football supporters.
    Perhaps because of such feelings, professional football clubs are often regarded as having
    a special status. In some respects that may be the correct view; but it should nevertheless
    not be overlooked that a modern professional football club is not a “club”, in the sense of
    an unincorporated association of members who join together in pursuit of a common
    purpose, but a commercial enterprise whose function is to generate profits for its
    shareholders. From that perspective it has no special status, and there is no reason why
    its tax affairs should not be as open to scrutiny as those of any other profit-making
    organisation. The players, too, have no greater right to conceal their tax affairs from
    public scrutiny than any other taxpayer. The fact that they are in the public eye is
    irrelevant. Any application for privacy, anonymity or redaction of detail must therefore
    be supported by the same type and quality of evidence as would be required of another
    taxpayer, and will be granted only for the same reasons.


  50. ianagain says:
    September 12, 2013 at 10:54 pm

    That whole thing is just becoming a huge face palm Ian. Really poor survey.


  51. HirsutePursuit says:
    September 12, 2013 at 11:44 pm

    Thanks for posting up the sections of Lord Bishop’s UTT warm-up. A salient lesson to me in reading beyond the first couple of pages (in an earlier post I criticised section 4’s apparently vague reference to ‘club’ and ‘new’).

    Apparently it all hit the fan this morning. The Ibrox typist was sending the reply re when “we were available so as not to be inconvenienced between the dates 6th Jan and 31st Mar 2014.” Something to do with seeking clarification on who “we” actually are…

    Seriously, just on another point. I notice in the SFA statement re Ian Black his club is listed as Rangers FC, not The Rangers FC. Shirley some mistake? I’ve said this all along, they can argue the point, they can even have the point re the history etc of their cloudy clubby thingy, but the formal entity that you can walk up and touch, that is registered, that holds player contracts, that wins (lower) league titles etc cannot be over run by those that would amend history. Whatever the entry put in that box for a similar purpose pre 2012 cannot be the same as now, IMHO.


  52. Reilly1926 says:
    September 13, 2013 at 10:00 am

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

    That was the part that caught my eye. I know that on here in the past certain posters have defended the decisions that the two lawyers (the majority to give them their monicker) came to on the basis that they would consider Murray Group/RFC to be “innocent until proven guilty”. I can understand that viewpoint but for “the majority” to not even consider any other possibilities for the use of these “loans” is unfathomable.


  53. Danish Pastry says:

    This is what happens in the real world. Sandy Bryson take note:

    http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/preliminaries/news/newsid=2172738/index.html

    ——————————————————————-

    This also happened to Equatorial Guinea http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/media/newsid=2138188/index.html
    Togo http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/organisation/news/newsid=2132048/index.html
    and Ethiopia http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/organisation/news/newsid=2128618/index.html

    Wouldn’t it be interesting if one or all of these nations decided to appeal the decision citing the “Bryson ruling” as a precedent….


  54. valentinesclown says:
    September 13, 2013 at 9:56 am
    As fans how many people have had a wee flutter on the football fixed odds coupons? More importantly how many have bet against their own team?
    Me NEVER.
    ==========================
    Me either, but I know friends who have. That’s neither here nor there though unless they can influence what happens on the pitch. Black could have and that’s why the rule’s there. An actual ten match ban may just about have got the SFA some credit here, although my instinct would have been for a more severe sanction given he bet on matches involving his own teams.


  55. tomtom says:
    September 13, 2013 at 10:13 am
    0 0 i Rate This
    Quantcast

    Reilly1926 says:
    September 13, 2013 at 10:00 am

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

    That was the part that caught my eye. I know that on here in the past certain posters have defended the decisions that the two lawyers (the majority to give them their monicker) came to on the basis that they would consider Murray Group/RFC to be “innocent until proven guilty”. I can understand that viewpoint but for “the majority” to not even consider any other possibilities for the use of these “loans” is unfathomable.

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

    Had HMRC contested that the whole EBT thing was a “Sham” (As we all know it was) the result would have went 3-0 the other way. Why they didn’t is a puzzler. The only thing I can think of is that they wanted a ruling against EBT’s in general and not just on this specific case.


  56. “I therefore direct that future hearings, whether in the Upper Tribunal or the First-tier Tribunal, shall be in public.”

    Now that’s want we want to see and hear!

    John Clarke,book your place in Court!


  57. MoreCelticParanoia says:
    September 13, 2013 at 10:20 am
    1 0 Rate

    Wouldn’t it be interesting if one or all of these nations decided to appeal the decision citing the “Bryson ruling” as a precedent….
    ————

    Yes!


  58. Reilly1926 says:
    September 13, 2013 at 10:25 am

    I read it slightly differently – they wanted an all encompassing ruling against EBT’s in general but were stymied in the way the case was brought – challenging the authenticity and operation specifically of the loans when in fact the loans (as opposed to the moneys coming in to actually fund the loans) were about the only thing they got right.

    Interesting that Lord Bishop specifically highlights that the two HMRC officers supporting the case against were specifically targetted and threatened. We knew this of course, I just find it interesting that he chose to highlight it again.

    I am reminded of Blackadder feeling he had a strong case against the trumped up charge of being a pigeon murderer. Then the judge turned up!


  59. http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/TCC/2013/B6.pdf

    3. Before embarking on an analysis of those questions it is necessary to explain something of the background. I begin by mentioning that, as the issues relate to the conduct of the litigation in the Upper Tribunal and the First-tier Tribunal, I sat as a judge of both tribunals in order that all of the issues could be determined at once.

    Note:Colin Bishopp sat both a First Tier Tribunal Judge and as an Upper Tribunal Tribunal Judge.

    We know that any decision made by an UTT will create (or reinforce existing) legal precedent. So, when we read Colin Bishopp’s “Reasons for Direction”, we should, of course, consider that his findings of fact carry considerable weight.

    It is interesting therefore, immediately following telling us that he is acting as an UTT Judge, he says:

    4. One of the Murray Group companies was Rangers Football Club plc (“RFC”), whose financial stability was known to be threatened by (among other things) tax debts, or at least claimed tax debts. As is well known, RFC collapsed into administration in March 2012, followed by liquidation in October 2012. It has been re-named RFC 2012 plc. The greater part of its business, and with it most of its assets, were purchased from the administrators in June 2012 by Sevco Scotland Ltd, which has since been re-named The Rangers Football Club Ltd. Although the professional football team known as Rangers had played in the Scottish Premier League until 2012, the collapse led to the ejection of the team from that league, and a team known as Rangers now plays in the Scottish Third Division.

    “…the collapse led to the ejection of the team from that league, and a team known as Rangers now plays in the Scottish Third Division.”

    He clearly gets the sensitivities and uses the term “team” rather than “club”. Nevertheless, it is clear that (other than the name) he assumes no link with the original SPL “team” and the “team known as Rangers” that had been accepted into the SFL’s lowest tier.

    He later goes on to say:

    27…professional football clubs are often regarded as having a special status. In some respects that may be the correct view; but it should nevertheless not be overlooked that a modern professional football club is not a “club”, in the sense of an unincorporated association of members who join together in pursuit of a common purpose, but a commercial enterprise whose function is to generate profits for its shareholders.

    Which means, in his findings of fact, that he considers a modern professional football club:
    1. To be a commercial enterprise
    2. To have shareholders

    A commercial enterprise with shareholders? Oh yes, I know, that is normally called a “company”. 😮

    Once again, understanding the sensitivities, he manages to state the position without using the “banned” language. Nevertheless, it is clearly stated, Judge Bishopp considers a modern football club to be a company.

    I was trying to find something in his findings that would correspond with the status of a “club” as understood by Lord Nimmo Smith. Perhaps it was covered by the “…having a special status”?

    Or perhaps that description only applies to whichever “club” is playing out of Ibrox?


  60. john clarke says:
    September 12, 2013 at 4:37 pm
    64 1 i
    Rate This

    Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
    September 12, 2013 at 4:07 pm
    ‘..midfielder Ian Black given 10 game ban for breaching betting rules. 7 suspended. Also receives £7.5k fine.’
    —–
    What an unhealthy precedent and heavy rod for their own already disgraced back has now been set by the Judicial panel.
    It is now beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is not to be trusted as being either wise, fair, balanced, or even aware of any implications other than how their judgments help or hinder an already corrupt club.
    There must be a massive outcry at this further weakening of any kind of proper governance of the game in Scotland.
    No player punter ( whether betting against or for his own club) is going to be seriously put off by this judgment.
    nor is any punting referee.
    The game’s a bogy, as far as sporting integrity is concerned.
    Who will now believe that any game is played honestly and fairly?
    ———————————————————-

    Did anyone see Gordon Smith’s stumbling performance on Sky Sports News yesterday morning?

    It wasn’t quite up there with the Python-esque farce of his ‘Ferguson and MacGregor have been given career bans not life bans’ conversation with Tom English but it was highly contradictory and incoherent nonetheless.

    I don’t recall verbatim but he started off giving the impression that the poor wee player was a victim of a web of complex legal regulations requiring the services of a Philadelphia lawyer to interpret (betting against your own team is a no no??) , then went onto say he has to receive some punishment and did everything in his manner short of apologising to Ally McCoist for saying so.. then stammered onto acknowledge this kind of thing is a problem so the SFA need to send out some sort of message….then the closing the piece de resistance… emphasised how this particular case is not so serious but of any more players are found to have done the same thing in the future THEY WILL NEED TO BE DEALT WITH MORE HARSHLY.

    Presuming they are not Sevco players he forgot to add.

    So there you have it, former SFA CEO recommends making rules up on the hoof. Also depressing that it’s the same old vanguard of ex-Sevco talking heads that are wheeled out on Sky

    I also found the reaction of the TV lamb consumers to the Black “verdict” interesting – I think it was the STV reporter from outside Hampden who said with glee that we all await Ally mcCoist’s reaction tomorrow “to hear just what he has to say about this”. He did stop short of saying “Tell the SFA to get it up them Ally WATP!” but the sense of excitement was palbable.

    And before you say he was excited about the newsorthiness of potential remarks for hype etc. Imagine Neil Lennon in the same position


  61. In deciding that the UTT should be open to the public the safety of the HMRC employees was a prime consideration.

    Colin Bishopp, Upper Tribunal Judge, President, First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber)

    ‘……. I therefore direct that future hearings, whether in the Upper Tribunal or the First-tier Tribunal, shall be in public, and that no anonymisation or redaction shall take place. I impose, however, three provisos.

    ‘First, as I have said, the two HMRC officers involved in the case had their identities concealed. Although there is no current evidence of possible threats against them I see no justification for exposing public servants carrying out their duty to a potential risk without good cause; none was identified ………..’.


  62. “innocent until proven guilty” was used a lot by the propagandists in the run up to the tribunal, it is the clever use of an emotive term in order to sway people’s opinions.

    The reality is that innocence or guilt was not and still is not an issue. Up to the point of the FTT ruling the tax in all cases was due, collection was put on hold because of the appeal. Once the FTT ruled then the position changed, some of the tax was due and some wasn’t (that was another nice piece of propaganda incidentally “Rangers won”, well yes, but not all of their case).

    As it stands now the tax is not due, but there is another appeal to be heard. The reality is that little has changed other than the appellant and respondent having changed places. More significantly this level of tribunal, the UTT can set precedent over subsequent FTT appeals.

    Oh and in my opinion if HMRC lose this one they will seek leave to appeal further. If theywere to win that then precedent would be set over subsequent UTTs as well.


  63. If the AGM now has to be held before 31st October(I know,I know),then what would be the usual timetable for release of the audited acounts(I still know,still know) to allow the shareholders to peruse same before the meeting.?.
    Is 4 weeks enough.Should the figs be released in normal circumstances by the end of September?.
    Just wondering as surely the spivs will want to have everything in place,ie,Sale/Leaseback whatever before the AGM.They’ll take as much with them as they can.That’ll include the property assets.IMO,probably wrong,they’ve got just under 7 weeks to strip the carcase.After that they may not have full control.
    If the results are as bad as some think,then what good is holding on until December?.
    The SP will dive bomb thus wiping out a lot of their profit.They could dump TRFC and be left with assets worth,say £25m which they can lease to whoever takes over TRFC or sell up and take the cash.(38p per share approx).
    Seems the sensible move to me..


  64. MoreCelticParanoia says:

    September 13, 2013 at 10:20 am

    1

    0

    Rate This

    Quantcast

    Danish Pastry says:

    This is what happens in the real world. Sandy Bryson take note:

    http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/preliminaries/news/newsid=2172738/index.html

    ——————————————————————-

    This also happened to Equatorial Guinea http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/media/newsid=2138188/index.html
    Togo http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/organisation/news/newsid=2132048/index.html
    and Ethiopia http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/organisation/news/newsid=2128618/index.html

    Wouldn’t it be interesting if one or all of these nations decided to appeal the decision citing the “Bryson ruling” as a precedent….
    ++++++++++++++++++++++
    What a coincidence! I was about to ask a general question on the Bryson ruling.

    If a club had paid a number of players by either a brown envelope stuffed with cash or a modern day equivalent so that there was no question that irregular payments had been made, would those players under the Bryson interpretation still be eligible to play until the payment method was uncovered or would it be deemed more than a mis registration issue and ineligible players had been fielded?

    I ask because the following from the LNS decision caught my attention.

    All parties concerned – clubs, players and footballing authorities – should be able to proceed on the faith of an official register. This means that a player’s registration should generally be treated as standing unless and until revoked.
    27
    There may be extreme cases in which there is such a fundamental defect that the registration of a player must be treated as having been invalid from the outset.

    and my question is what represents an extreme case? Anyone any idea? Any parameters?


  65. Reilly1926 says:
    September 13, 2013 at 10:25 am
    0 0 Rate This

    tomtom says:
    September 13, 2013 at 10:13 am
    0 0 i Rate This
    Quantcast

    Reilly1926 says:
    September 13, 2013 at 10:00 am

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

    That was the part that caught my eye. I know that on here in the past certain posters have defended the decisions that the two lawyers (the majority to give them their monicker) came to on the basis that they would consider Murray Group/RFC to be “innocent until proven guilty”. I can understand that viewpoint but for “the majority” to not even consider any other possibilities for the use of these “loans” is unfathomable.

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

    Had HMRC contested that the whole EBT thing was a “Sham” (As we all know it was) the result would have went 3-0 the other way. Why they didn’t is a puzzler. The only thing I can think of is that they wanted a ruling against EBT’s in general and not just on this specific case.
    =====================================================

    The desire for an EBT ruling in general has been put forward before by many posters on here. I simply don’t buy that. HMRC could not have possibly known that the two lawyers (the majority) would arrive at the verdict they came to and the accountant would differ therefore allowing for the case to go to the UTT. If this was part of some masterplan then it was an extremely risky strategy. I believe it more likely that they thought their case was so strong (and in any other country it would have been) that the verdict was a fait accomplit and they didn’t need to press home the argument.

    I also believe that the majority were looking for ways to find RFC not guilty rather than looking at the evidence on the whole and judging it on the balance of what was reasonable and probable. If 5 players were found to have been in breach of the regulations I don’t think it’s unreasonable to assume that the other players were probably paid by the club in the same circuitous manner even if the evidence against them was less compelling. It’s almost as if the majority were batting for one side but of course that could never happen in a fair, free and open society 🙄

    However I’m not a lawyer, I’m only a person that looks at things with an open mind. If something looks like a tax scam and sounds like a tax scam then it’s probably a duck where RFC are concerned. In Scotland anyway.


  66. Is there a prize for the first Sevconian to mention the Honourable Judge’s surname.

    2nd prize to the first Sevconian who wonders if the Honourable Judge has any children with Timmy sounding names.

Leave a Reply