The SPFL— the case for revolution, evolution and a case of the Hamilton Whackies !

Good Evening.

As we ponder the historic vote to create a new Governing body to oversee Scottish League football, I cannot help but wonder what brilliant minds will be employed in the drawing up of its constitution, rules, memorandum and articles of association?

Clearly, Messrs Doncaster, Longmuir and even Mr Regan as the CEO of the SFA will be spending many hours with those dreaded folk known simply as “ The Lawyers” in an attempt to get the whole thing up and running and written down in the course of a few short weeks.

In truth, that scares me.

It scares me because legal documentation written up in a hurry or in a rush is seldom perfect and often needs amendment—especially when the errors start to show! The old adage of beware of the busy fool sadly applies.

It also scares me because the existing rules under which the game is governed are not, in my humble opinion, particularly well written and seem to differ in certain material respects from those of UEFA. Even then, adopting the wording and the approach of other bodies is not necessarily the way to go.

I am all in favour of some original thought– and that most precious and unusual of commodities known as common sense and plain English.

Further, the various licensing and compliance rules are clearly in need of an overhaul as they have of late produced what can only be best described as a lack of clarity when studied for the purposes of interpretation. Either that or those doing the studying and interpreting are afflicted with what might be described as tortuous or even tortured legal and administrative minds.

If it is not by now clear that the notion of self-certification on financial and other essential disclosure criteria necessary to obtain a footballing licence (whether European or domestic) is a total non-starter — then those in charge of the game are truly bonkers.

Whilst no governing body can wholly control the actions of a member club, or those who run a club, surely provisions can be inserted into any constitution or set of rules that allows and brings about greater vigilance and scrutiny than we have at present—all of course designed to do nothing other than alert the authorities as early as possible if matters are not being conducted properly or fairly.

However, the main change that would make a difference to most of the folk involved in the Scottish game – namely the fans— would be to have the new rules incorporate a measure which allowed football fans themselves to be represented on any executive or committee.

Clearly, this would be a somewhat revolutionary step and would be fought against tooth and nail by some for no reason other than that it has simply not been done before—especially as the league body is there to regulate the affairs of a number of limited companies all of whom have shareholders to account to and the clubs themselves would presumably be the shareholders in the new SPFL Ltd.

Then again to my knowledge Neil Doncaster is not a shareholder in The SPL ltd– is he?

I can hear the argument that a fan representative on a league body might not be impartial, might be unprofessional, might be biased, might lack knowledge or experience, and have their own agenda and so on—just like many chairmen and chief executive officers who already sit on the committees of the existing league bodies.

Remember too that the SFA until relatively recently had disciplinary committees made up almost exclusively of referees. I don’t think anyone would argue that the widening of the make up of that committee has been a backward step.

However, we already have fan representation at clubs like St Mirren and Motherwell, and of course there has been an established Tartan Army body for some time now. Clubs other than the two mentioned above have mechanisms whereby they communicate and consult with fans, although they stop short of full fan participation– very often for supposedly insurmountable legal reasons.

As often as not, the fans want a say in the running of their club, but also want to be able to make representations to the governing bodies via their club.

So why not include the fans directly in the new set up for governing the league?

Any fan representative could  be someone proposed by a properly registered fan body such as through official supporters clubs, or could be seconded by the clubs acting in concert with their supporters clubs.

Perhaps a committee of fan representatives could be created, with such a committee having a representative on the various committees of the new league body.

In this way, there would be a fan who could report back to the fan committee and who could represent the interests of the ordinary fan in the street in any of the committees. Equally such a committee of fans could ensure that any behind the scenes discussions on any issue were properly reported, openly discussed, and made public with no fear of hidden agendas, secret meetings, and secret collusive agreements and so forth.

Is any of that unreasonable? Surely many companies consider the views of their biggest customer? This idea is no different.

Surely such a situation would go some way towards establishing some badly needed trust between the governing bodies and the fans themselves?

If necessary, I would not even object to the fan representatives being excluded from having a right to vote on certain matters—as long as they had a full right of audience and a full right of access to all discussions and relative papers which affect the running of the game.

In this way at least there would be openness and transparency.

In short, it would be a move towards what is quaintly referred to as Democracy.

Perhaps, those who run the game at present should consider the life and times of the late great Alexander Hamilton- one of the founding fathers of the United States of America and who played a significant role in helping write the constitution of that country.

Hamilton was a decent and brilliant man in many ways—but he was dead set against Democracy and the liberation of rights for the masses. In fact, he stated that the best that can be hoped for the mass populace is that they be properly armed with a gun and so able to protect themselves against injustice!

Sadly, Hamilton became embroiled in a bitter dispute with the then Vice President of the nation Aaron Burr in July 1804. Hamilton had used his influence and ensured that Burr lost the election to become Governor of New York and had made some withering attacks on the Vice President’s character.

When he refused to apologise, the Vice President took a whacky notion and challenged him to a duel! Even more whacky is the fact that Hamilton accepted the challenge and so the contest took place at Weehawken New Jersey on the morning of 11th July 1804.

The night before, Hamilton wrote a letter which heavily suggested that he would contrive to miss Burr with his shot, and indeed when the pistols fired Hamilton’s bullet struck a branch immediately above Burr’s head.

However, he did not follow the proper procedure for duelling which required a warning from the duellist that they are going to throw their shot away. Hamilton gave no such indication despite the terms of his letter and despite his shot clearly missing his opponent.

Burr however fired and hit Hamilton in the lower abdomen with the result that the former secretary to the treasury and founding father of the constitution died at 2pm on the twelfth of July.

The incident ruined Burr’s career (whilst duelling was still technically legal in New jersey, it had already been outlawed in various other states).

In any event, in Hamilton’s time full and open democracy in the United States of America would have met with many cries of outrage and bitter opposition. Yet, today, the descendants of slaves and everyone from all social standings, all ethnic minorities and every social background has the constitutional right to vote and seek entry to corridors of power.

In that light, is it really asking too much to allow football fans to have a say and a presence in the running of a game they pay so much to support?

 

4,181 thoughts on “The SPFL— the case for revolution, evolution and a case of the Hamilton Whackies !


  1. paulsatim says:
    June 24, 2013 at 12:40 pm

    Bill McMurdo Blog this morning:

    “It is well-known that Rangers have extended favours to teams in the past. I remember two occasions from my boyhood when teams got end-of-season “surprise” results at Ibrox that helped them beat the drop”.

    Cheating other teams again!
    ___________________________________________________

    I expect this is just a lot of mince from someone trying to reinforce the ‘they’re all out to get us’ or ‘they all owe us’ obsession. There may well have been times Rangers lost last day matches to teams that avoided the drop, but that would most likely be because their players were disinterested and thinking of their holidays rather than trying to ‘save’ their opponents. There are probably more ‘surprise’ results on the last day of the season than on any other Saturday (or Sunday) of the year. No player wants to ‘relegate’ any side, unless they have, themselves, something for or against their opponents or the ‘other’ team which might lead to individuals not trying too hard, but I doubt instructions are ever issued, from the board or management, to let the opposition win. What a great chapter that would make in a player with a grudge’s autobiography 🙂

    Should Celtic ever have been in a position where RFC might have helped get them relegated then maybe what I’ve written wouldn’t be the case… 😉


  2. Bawsman says:
    June 24, 2013 at 12:07 pm
    ———————————–
    Great point Bawsman – although you spelled Auldheid’s name wrong, the sort of error which if repeated on any SFA form would lead to immediate expulsion…..

    Also you omitted some others in the “roll of honour” (if such a phrase is permitted in the police state we inhabit today) – giants such as Jim “The Fax” Farry, “Honest” Jack Steedman, Willie Allan and the infamous George Graham, who in the 1950s attempted to put Celtic out of business over the question of what flags could or could not fly over a Scottish football ground.


  3. Charlotte Fakeovers ‏@CharlotteFakes 1m
    Future players could receive EBTs.
    Boumsong had £200k in his 2 months before scoring last minute winner in the French Cup Final for Auxerre

    Hmmmm


  4. FTTT 29 October 2010 – [S]DEM Knight of Tax Evadere

    In your own words [S]DEM:-

    “On 20 April 2001, the Murray Group Management Limited Remuneration Trust (the ‘Trust’) was established by Murray Group Management Limited, a company forming part of the Group.

    It was a Trust which was intended to be used to provide benefits to present, past and future
    employees of the company and their relatives.”


  5. Bawsman
    Indeed. That list supports my core point about lack of leadership.

    Yer on a caution for mispelling Auldheid, one more time and its a red. 🙂


  6. paulsatim says:
    June 24, 2013 at 1:35 pm

    Not sure. He was a Bosman, and his deal may have already been agreed by that time. However, it’s rumoured that Rangers got him ahead of Liverpool due to the larger sign-on fee. No doubt this EBT.

    So a player is signed due to EBT use that they would not otherwise have got . No sporting advantage.


  7. torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says: June 24, 2013 at 11:18 am

    Celtic will play Cliftonville! Home tie first.
    =============================
    Bad timing for the away leg. Hearts are in a pre season tournament in Ballymena from 24th-27th July with Celta Vigo, a Liverpool XI and hosts Crusaders. Lets hope that all fans behave themselves impeccably, should they encounter one another.


  8. Auldheid says:
    June 24, 2013 at 11:13 am

    Ecobhoy

    You might not accept it as having a legal base but the msm are acting as if it has and have sought legal advice which might have been different and on your lines had Levenson not happened.

    So we are where we are. The material is there because someone got their hands on it and is publishing it. Its bit like stolen goods in a car boot sale except the buyers know the stuff is dodgy and so will not touch it.
    What I have read against known context says it is definitely genuine and one way or another the truth will eventually out.

    The material itself raises many questions on Scottish society and its ability to handle the truth and act justly never mind Scottish football and in a run up to an independence referendum the silence is not a good advert for the kind of society that might emerge if unbridled by the balance being part of a wider population base brings.

    I do not mean to take the debate here into pros and cons of independence but I do not like what I see in leadership terms across all parties -political , football and media.
    ========================================================================

    I’m not so much bothered about the legal aspects although I worry wgenb people bandy about Leveson as if that has any legal meaning when id doesn’t either north or south of the boarder. I also worry about people who continually use the ‘art and part’ threat to using the stuff when Scots Law is clear that ‘art and part’ only applies in the planning and execution of whatever and not what happens afterwards.

    But what truly annoys me is the MSM drivel that a journo has to know their source to be able to ‘guarantee’ the info. Utter piffle and most journos don’t know a ‘source’ of a story at least to begin with – they might later learn the identity of the source but often not.

    The source provides the tip or info that the journalist then has to corroborate. Even if they know the source and they have been 100% reliable in the past and future info must be tested to see whether it is true or not.

    The CF material is exactly the same – it provides excellent leads for checking from other sources and there is nothing which can legally stop that process. The SMSM had no quibbles about stuff that was nicked from a break-in at Lothian & Borders HQ at Fettes and from the Special Branch office no less if my memory serves me correctly. There was also the later connection to the Magic Circle case.

    So if it was all right then why isn’t it now. To me the answer is obvious and that is that the CF material shows how conlicted a helluva lot of journos and pundits are. Now if the foot soldiers are conflicted what about senior editors?

    I think it’s fair to say they are in the deep brown stuff way over their head so there is an understanding that has been reached to sit tight and wait for it all to blow over. And tbh I have no time for journos who aid this process by vague suggestions of interdicts/injunctions and other unspecified threats.

    I have had several well-respected journos give me the reasons why the SMSM aren’t using the CF material – these are journos I know aren’t in any PR pocket and who haven’t actually been involved in the story to date other than the periphery. And like a number of sensible journos with clean hands they are keeping away from it on the basis that the lamb-suppers can clean-up their own mess.

    The truly amazing thing is that they have all given different reasons – btw none of them stand-up but that’s the line their various employers are taking at least for internal consumption.

    A poster said that journos aren’t interested in the CF material. They are the biggest followers and readers of CF and are emailing and texting each other with every revelation involving colleagues and having a laugh at their expense 🙂


  9. paulsatim says:

    June 24, 2013 at 12:40 pm
    ———————————–

    Whether he says something you like or something you disagree with, the boy is still a fool. Don’t place too much faith in anything that he writes as truth or not, it is tainted. This is the same guy who has spent the best part of his blog writing career telling Celtic fans they are paranoid for suggesting that very thing, strange little world he lives in.

    I am still of the belief that players slow down and ease off at the end of the season when it does not directly affect their team, I do not however believe that teams cheat. I cannot remember ever going into a game thinking I don’t want to win, even if we were far superior on the day, the overriding aim was to win and to score as many as possible.

    Another point, why would someone spend the last 2 years bleating about other fans calling them cheats then claim his team openly cheated, question the motivation!


  10. broganrogantrevinoandhogan says:
    June 24, 2013 at 12:22 am

    I love reading many of your stories and greatly admire your writing skills and style which far surpasses my own abilities.

    I try to base my comments on dry facts and not perhaps how I may have wished, in an emotional sense, things to have worked out. As such there are bits of the LNS Decision that I accept as fact and bits I don’t accept.

    I simply don’t accept your statement that: ‘By any stretch of the imagination what you are seeing is tortuous and twisted legal thinking which almost inevitable produces a ridiculous legal consequence’ unless you can actually demonstrate the hard facts that have brought you to that conclusion.

    Let’s take your comment: ‘The majority took the view that the revenue having asked them to consider the loans from the trusts to the players as real and effective, then must by sheer logic accept that you don’t pay tax on a loan! End of case and cheerio’.

    The Majority used their interpretation of the law to arrive at their decision which I happen to believe was wrong. However, you diss the reasoning of the two legally qualified FTTT members with a ‘pop’ approach IMO.

    I am sure in view of your own professional expertise that you know as well as I do that the HMRC decision not to treat the trusts as ‘sham’ as opposed to real and effective has very significant and complex legal consequences and isn’t actually an ‘End of case and cheerio’ scenario in the slightest. It was probably a keystone decision for the HMRC case but way beyond the remit of this blog and probably the interest of its posters to fully examine.

    As to Dr Poon, whose Minority Finding I support, I’m not really sure what point you are trying to make and your comment ‘yada yada yada … we know where she went’ doesn’t actually help me assess the relevance of your position in any case.

    As to what the UTT will decide or even a subsequent appeal against the UTT decision, from either side, personally I try not to speculate because I haven’t read a transcript of the FTTT hearing and have seen none of the voluminous written evidence presented to the FTTT. I therefore feel that any speculation on my part would be ill-conceived and might lead me into a trap whereby I rejected the UTT decision solely or mainly on the grounds that it didn’t ‘fit’ with my preconceived and ill-informed position.

    The Rangers story so far, in terms of legal and similar proceedings, has been littered with pre-conceived speculation on what was going to happen which invariably has proven to be misguided for a number of reasons and IMO prime among them is that heart and emotion has over-ruled brain and fact.

    You state: ‘The SPL and The SFA could just stick with the decision of the FTT (even though it has been overturned ) and ignore the UTT decision and its implications and its meaning — unlike every other body corporate and individual in the country.

    ‘If they have said that they will stick to the FTT ruling in the face of a successful appeal to the UTT……
    ‘Then as I have said……. that is tortuous legal thinking!’

    The SPL position put to LNS was: ‘The SPL presented no argument to challenge the decision of the majority of the Tax Tribunal and Mr McKenzie stated expressly that for all purposes of this Commission’s Inquiry and Determination the SPL accepted that decision as it stood, without regard to any possible appeal by HMRC. Accordingly we proceed on the basis that the EBT arrangements were lawful’.

    LNS adds at [53] ‘We wish to emphasise that the issues before this Commission as to alleged contraventions of the SPL Rules are very different from the questions of tax law which the Tax Tribunal was required to decide.’

    Unlike yourself, I actually don’t believe that every ‘individual in the country’ will be hanging on the result of the UTT and I think most people are well aware of the small minority of even the football-supporting population who have an interest and why. I think we should not get too carried away in mistaking what relevance anoraks, like myself. have wrt ordinary football fans who just want to watch a game of football.

    As to ‘every other body corporate’ also constantly worried about the UTT result I don’t believe that’s the case. There will be a fairly narrow band of accountants dealing with related tax matters that will have an interest and possibly some companies that have used EBTs.

    I’m also not as clear as you seem to be about the future SFA position, should the UTT uphold the HMRC appeal, which you seem to equate with that of the SPL whose position before LNS I have outlined above.

    I have never seen the SFA’s position on the matter advanced so it’s possible it might be different from that of the SPL and they may also feel they could act in the light of the UTT decision – although I think that unlikely.

    However these are issues for the SFA. But again I cannot accept your again-repeated ‘tortuous legal thinking’ comment as it doesn’t appear to me to reflect what actually happened because the legal thinking to me is plain and I am but a layman.


  11. So Just back from two fantastic weeks in Portugal (only good things to say), what have I missed without reading the last 2000 comments? 🙂


  12. Boumsong was born in Douala, Cameroon, and started his career with French team Le Havre before joining Auxerre. He notably scored the 89th-minute winning goal in Auxerre’s 2–1 win in the 2003 French Cup Final against Paris Saint-Germain.

    A long-time target for then Liverpool manager Gérard Houllier, the press speculated that it was only a matter of time before Boumsong signed for Liverpool. However, as Boumsong was a free agent, his agent, the Monaco based Scot Willie McKay negotiated the best sign-on fee to the player for Boumsong from Scottish Premier League club Rangers.

    As a result, Boumsong joined Alex McLeish at Rangers in 2004 and signed a five-year contract. Boumsong quickly adapted to the Scottish game and showed his skill as a centre back, leading to rumours that his stay in Glasgow may be shorter than expected.

    Halfway through the 2004–05 season, Newcastle under new manager Graeme Souness, made an £8 million bid for him, which Rangers accepted in a deal that was finalized once the January 2005 transfer window opened.


  13. There is absolutely nothing to stop any journalist formulating and actually asking some questions based on the CF revelations. Why are none of our so-called journalists asking any questions based on this goldmine of material? They don’t have to quote CF, just ask the questions. isn’t that how it works? Get the denials,note them down, get them confirmed. They will surely come in handy later. Come on PhilMcG, AlexT, explain to me the problem? Or is it all just another great big broom, sweeping yet another big heap of stuff under yet another big carpet? For shame! The fourth estate? Protector of our liberty? Bought and sold by the other three estates, more like.


  14. neepheid says:
    June 24, 2013 at 2:19 pm

    more to the point…..are the SFA saying anything about this? Have they decided just to accept the Pinsent Mason report or will they dig a little deeper – gone very quiet on that front eh?


  15. However, as Boumsong was a free agent, his agent, the Monaco based Scot Willie McKay negotiated the best sign-on fee to the player for Boumsong from Scottish Premier League club Rangers.

    Halfway through the 2004–05 season, Newcastle under new manager Graeme Souness, made an £8 million bid for him, which Rangers accepted in a deal that was finalized once the January 2005 transfer window opened.

    FTTT 29 October 2010 – [S]DEM Knight of Tax Evadere

    In your own words [S]DEM:-

    “In the summer of 2005, I came across an opportunity to purchase a dilapidated villa (‘Bel Azur’) near Cap d’Antibes in France at a competitive price. I noticed the villa in question because it was close to my own villa. I considered that there was the potential for the villa to be purchased, developed and sold at a profit.”


  16. weeminger says:
    June 24, 2013 at 1:48 pm

    surely thought, its not right he was getting paid by rangers while still under contract to another club/team/business?!


  17. TW says:
    June 24, 2013 at 10:01 am
    18 0 Rate This

    Althetim says:
    June 23, 2013 at 11:13 pm

    The evidence of malpractice is overwhelming yet the guilty go unpunished, the “The Rangers” are allowed to masquerade as Rangers and the MSM continue to toe the party line.
    “Their friends will help them”, my old man said. And they did.

    Abandon all hope of justice, we are pissing against the tide.
    ———————————————-
    Corrupt structures slowly become arrogant, lazy, bloated, then collapse under their own weight, and what ultimately changes things can be something relatively small. You never know what is going to end up making a significant difference.
    ________________________________________________________________________________________

    ( With the greatest of respect )

    Let’s be clear – RFC(IL) is like the Titanic, it has sunk.

    TRFC is merely the survivors in a lifeboat.

    On the lifeboat, the name ‘Titanic’ has been painted, for the comfort of the survivors.

    Their unshakeable belief in the ‘unsinkable’ ship has gone into shock and they remain in denial.

    But a lifeboat from the Titanic is patently not the Titanic.

    TRFC is not RFC

    “what ultimately changes things can be something relatively small. You never know what is going to end up making a significant difference. ” TW

    It is a fact that the Titanic’s steel plates were rivetted on it’s curved surfaces using iron rivets and not with the much stronger steel rivets. This was down to the pneumatic rivetting machines being unable to work properly on the curved plates. The choice of iron rivets was due to them being easier to hammer down. But, crucially, the iron rivets would only allow the steel plates to move a mere 5mm before bursting. And so the mighty Titanic
    had an inbuilt Achilles’ Heel before it even launched. It was no match for an iceberg.

    This tiny detail proved decisive for the ship, it’s passengers and crew. The rest is history.

    RFC spent money it didn’t have and for a very long time. This became it’s Achilles’ Heel. The rest is history.

    TRFC seem to be continuing with this ‘tradition’. The same Achilles’ Heel. The history is being written.

    It’s rivetting.


  18. paulsatim says:
    June 24, 2013 at 2:52 pm

    Was that not just it getting set-up in his name? Rather than the money actually being paid to him? Had something happened whereby he had never become a Rangers player I don’t think he would have got the money. I can’t recall when he signed his pre-contract agreement, was it very last minute?

    As an aside I’d completely forgotten about the dodgy-ness of his move to Newcastle. I remembered the fee being high, but not that it happened only a half season after he joined Rangers.


  19. ecobhoy says:
    June 24, 2013 at 1:49 pm

    I have had several well-respected journos give me the reasons why the SMSM aren’t using the CF material – these are journos I know aren’t in any PR pocket and who haven’t actually been involved in the story to date other than the periphery. And like a number of sensible journos with clean hands they are keeping away from it on the basis that the lamb-suppers can clean-up their own mess.

    The truly amazing thing is that they have all given different reasons – btw none of them stand-up but that’s the line their various employers are taking at least for internal consumption.

    A poster said that journos aren’t interested in the CF material. They are the biggest followers and readers of CF and are emailing and texting each other with every revelation involving colleagues and having a laugh at their expense
    ———————————————————————————————————————————————-
    In an age where each newspaper in this country are constantly trying to outdo each other, I find it hard to comprehend that not one will even touch the CF material for whatever reason. It’s a potential goldmine.
    It shows what a pathetic excuse we have for journalists here that they are happy to just have a laugh at the revelations instead of actually doing their job and investigating them, especially if their ‘hands are clean’.
    What bothers me even more though, is that the ‘bampots’ are steering clear of it too.
    What are they afraid of?


  20. easyJambo says:
    June 24, 2013 at 1:48 pm
    ————————
    Hearts in a pre-season tournament? I don’t think so EJ. Their pre-season consists of getting enough money together to be able to start the SPL season in August.

    No one is going to pay for them even to get a bus from St Andrews Square to play in Belfast in July. It will not be high on Bryan jackson’s list of prirorities.


  21. Sam says:
    June 24, 2013 at 2:39 pm
    ‘…” I considered that there was the potential for the villa to be purchased, developed and sold at a profit.”
    ——
    A dear old friend of mine used to have a guy working for him in the property business. That guy moved on to work as property adviser for another company.
    He got to hear that his old boss had a property to sell that his new boss might be interested in.
    So he did a deal with his old boss under which, in return for persuading his new boss to buy that property at a hugely inflated price, his old boss would slide a few bob to him, tax free.
    No, i just made that up.
    Couldn’t happen, could it?


  22. Matteo Galy says:
    June 24, 2013 at 3:20 pm

    It shows what a pathetic excuse we have for journalists here that they are happy to just have a laugh at the revelations instead of actually doing their job and investigating them, especially if their ‘hands are clean’.
    What bothers me even more though, is that the ‘bampots’ are steering clear of it too.
    What are they afraid of?
    ==========================================================

    The journalists involved can’t do their job and investigate because their bosses have decided they shouldn’t – the bosses also decided much earlier in the story to leave the legal, accountancy and sundry other business specialities to sport journos because they knew virtually nothing about such matters.

    But as to the ‘bampots’ I too have been pondering why so many appear to be hanging-fire – but whatever their reason it appears to me that the PR campaign about dire penalties if you publish seems to be another roaring success.

    It could be that some are worried there reputation might take a knock if the likes of CW is behind CF – my own opinion is it doesn’t really matter if the material is correct and so far there is virtually nothing that rings alarm bells for me. But it has to be checked obviously and that is what should be happening and quite a few on here are doing that as best they can.


  23. RANGERS FURY AT pounds 150k BUNG SLUR; EXCLUSIVE Bain house deal probed by French Murray says chief did nothing unlawful.

    By James Traynor

    RANGERS chief executive Martin Bain plans to sue over claims he took pounds 150,000 in bungs during player transfers.

    He was accused of pocketing the cash two years ago in an article in a French newspaper yesterday.

    At the time, Gers were involved with agent Ranko Stojic in deals to bring Jean-Alain Boumsong and Dado Prso to Glasgow from French clubs.

    Bain and Stojic were involved in a property deal at the same time.

    French authorities are investigating the allegations.

    But Rangers owner David Murray said: “At no time has he acted illegally or improperly.”

    Agents from the French police’s national division of financial investigations have visited Ibrox.

    Furious Bain last night pledged to take legal action over the allegations in L’Equipe. The report claimed he had received payments amounting to pounds 150,000 from Serbian Stojic.

    L’Equipe also suggested that Bain could find himself under investigation by French police.

    French authorities have been probing deals involving Paris Saint Germain and Stojic.

    Officers are said to have uncovered papers relating to two payments made by Stojic to Bain on August 20, 2004, through Stojic’s account with the Rothschild Bank in Monaco.

    L’Equipe also state a decision on whether or not to investigate these new findings had not yet been made.

    As part of their investigation, French police also went to St James’ Park in Newscastle – where Boumsong moved after Rangers.

    The Record understands Bain has confirmed to Murray that he was involved in a transaction with Stojic – to help him buy a house in France from a player on the agent’s books.

    Bain said the deal helped him buy a property owned by former Chelsea and Manchester City player Laurent Charvet – but he repaid the agent.

    He has produced his bank statements which satisfied Murray as proof Stojic’s money was paid back in full.

    But the timing of the transaction – during the period which saw Stojic clients Boumsong and Prso sign for Rangers – raised suspicions among the French revenue investigators, which led them to focus on Bain.

    In a statement, Murray said: “An article appeared in L’Equipe today concerning a financial transaction between Rangers chief executive Martin Bain and Ranko Stojic.

    “For the avoidance of doubt, I was made aware of this transaction in advance of it proceeding.

    “It related to the purchase of a house in France by Martin Bain which belonged to a player, Laurent Charvet, represented by Mr Stojic.

    “I am satisfied that all matters were carried out in the correct manner.

    “This was a personal matter entirely unrelated to Martin’s responsibilities to the club and at no time has he acted illegally or improperly.”

    Bain’s lawyers, Levy & McRae, warned other papers not to repeat the allegations, pointing out “they are completely without foundation”.

    Bain joined Rangers’ commercial staff in 1996 and was appointed director of football business in 2002.

    The 38-year-old was made a club director the previous year and is only Rangers’ fourth chief executive.

    French magistrates have been trying to clamp down on corruption in their game.

    In particular they are scrutinising 19 deals and, like UEFA, they are worried about football being used for money laundering.

    I’m satisfied matters were carried out in the correct manner’


  24. slimshady61 says:

    June 24, 2013 at 3:24 pm

    6

    1

    Rate This

    Quantcast

    easyJambo says:
    June 24, 2013 at 1:48 pm
    ————————
    Hearts in a pre-season tournament? I don’t think so EJ. Their pre-season consists of getting enough money together to be able to start the SPL season in August.

    No one is going to pay for them even to get a bus from St Andrews Square to play in Belfast in July. It will not be high on Bryan jackson’s list of prirorities.
    ================================
    I disagree Slim. Bryan Jackson’s immediate priority is to raise money to keep the club going during the pre season. It their participation means that they will receive even £10K for their involvement, then it is a worthwhile exercise.


  25. ecobhoy says:
    June 24, 2013 at 1:57 pm
    =====================================
    First of all, kudos to you and the others for the fascinating debate of the past few days.
    I’m also a layman but my view is that not only should justice be done, it should be seen to have been done.
    I’ve studied up a little on jury nullification, and I believe that judges also have the power to set aside a conviction if they believe it will lead to an injustice.

    Both of the above apply the application of common sense, something which the FTT except Poon, and LNS failed to do. LNS should have told Bryson his testimony lacked merit. He should have seen through the pantomime case presented by the SPL.

    If Paul Foot was to be believed, LNS is allegedly no stranger to injustice.


  26. paulsatim says:

    June 24, 2013 at 12:40 pm

    Bill McMurdo Blog this morning:

    “It is well-known that Rangers have extended favours to teams in the past. I remember two occasions from my boyhood when teams got end-of-season “surprise” results at Ibrox that helped them beat the drop”.

    Cheating other teams again!
    ………………………………

    In layman Terms Paul…It’s called match fixing…and if I am honest..it would not surprise me in the slightest…I would not put anything past that shower…

    Have a think back over the last 18 months…and everything that has taken place…which we have witnessed….and with hand on heart tell me if you think it is not possible?


  27. There is an interesting statement today on the Hearts official website. It comes from the Foundation of Hearts, but is basically an advert for them seeking further pledges from fans. In addition, it appears that FoH are also being given permission to email the statement to everyone on the Hearts database (71,000 fans).

    As BDO are appointees of the court, they should be seen to be fair to all parties interested in buying the club. I wonder if they will allow others to make such a statement to fans. I would also question whether or not they are observing Data Protection laws, when permitting FOH to contact all those on the Hearts database.

    I have no issue with FOH and have already pledged support for then, but given all the issues discussed during the RFC administration it seems a bid odd that they would provide assistance to one party at this stage of the process. If FoH had gained preferred bidder status, then I could understand it, but not at this time..

    http://www.heartsfc.co.uk/articles/20130624/foundation-of-hearts-statement_2241384_3218901


  28. Re Boumsong
    JAB played 19 games for ragers ,on signing for them he received a £635,000 loan from the EBT trust .
    Before the signing Ewan Cameron of Real Radio said he would run round Ibrokes naked if Boumsong came to the SPL .JAB did and EC ran round Ibrokes (in a mankini) .
    I always remember Wullie Mckay JABs agent on the phone in show saying ………
    I touted the deal around a few clubs and to give DM his due he was the only one with the BALLS to do the deal .Right away it struck me ,why would you need BALLS to sign an up and coming French international on a free transfer and now we all know why .
    Newcastle paid £8m for a player they could have got for nothing 6 months earlier .It stunk then and it still stinks today .
    The irony is that is was whilst raiding Ibrokes regarding Boumsongs transfer that the COLP came across the EBT info .
    Now that’s what I call KARMA .


  29. easyJambo says:
    June 24, 2013 at 5:10 pm

    It appears that FoH are also being given permission to email the statement to everyone on the Hearts database (71,000 fans). As BDO are appointees of the court, they should be seen to be fair to all parties interested in buying the club. I wonder if they will allow others to make such a statement to fans. I would also question whether or not they are observing Data Protection laws, when permitting FOH to contact all those on the Hearts database.

    I have no issue with FOH and have already pledged support for then, but given all the issues discussed during the RFC administration it seems a bid odd that they would provide assistance to one party at this stage of the process. If FoH had gained preferred bidder status, then I could understand it, but not at this time..

    http://www.heartsfc.co.uk/articles/20130624/foundation-of-hearts-statement_2241384_3218901

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

    I suppose if they allow one the facility they would need to allow it to others to be even handed but perhaps FoH are the only ones who have put in a request.

    It might be there is no data protection issue as long as Hearts don’t release the actual email addresses to FoH but send the emails out on their behalf from the club servers and I would presume the normal tick-box rules as to whether the supporter has agreed to accept emails from third parties or parties associated with the club would apply or perhaps not given the dire problems faced by the club.


  30. paulmac
    And there lies the problem with the SPL needs a strong Sevco brigade
    A Sevco struggling in the bottom 6 of the SPL is as of much use to the SFA/MSM/SPL/LL /PEEPIL .
    as a Sevco in Div 3


  31. Easyjambo
    I hope there is someone else making vital decisions for your club at the moment other than GL if this was his idea .
    talk about out of touch ,good grief .


  32. When I get my eyes tested

    a time comes

    when the optician will say –

    ‘better with

    -or without ?’.

    When I look at Scottish Football now

    and, thinking of TRFC,

    I can see quite clearly –

    better without !


  33. Re the FTT/UTT
    I was under the impression that HMRC ‘s original case was for over 100 EBTs ,81 of which related to players .Now as some have said that the amount taken to appeal was 30 with 5 being admitted as being liable for tax ,so does that mean that the UTT is only looking at 25 cases ,if so what happened to the other 56 cases of player EBTs .
    Were they deemed by HMRC as being legitimate loans and not challenged or were the 5 cases added to them as proven .
    I may be well of the mark here but I cannot remember any reported decision on the other 56


  34. Ecobhoy 1.49

    I see where you are coming from and it supports the thought that for this truth to come out the truthseekers in the media any will be from outside Scottish borders and for that reason will find it difficult to gain national interest in what the view as a backwater sport in a backwatet bananas republic on their border.
    I would be amazed if journos are not aware of the stuff but what meaning are the giving it? Is it just a laugh at expense of colleagues exposed or do they appreciate that to laugh and not act simply undermines the very industries – media and football- that they rely on for a living?
    The more serious must realise that by doing and saying nothing they are party to the lies being exposed.


  35. Just a general point.

    Definitions, simply as a general concept, attempt to give a reader clarity as to the writer’s intentions.

    It is important that any word or expression used in general speech, and which is capable of being interpreted in more than one way, is clearly defined, both by its nature and by its scope – in the context of the document within which it is employed.

    Sometimes circumstances are not straightforward and a word or expression seems (at first reading) to be used in a clumsy and awkward manner. But normally, when you fully understand the context and the specific definition it has been given, the “awkward” word or expression falls neatly into place.

    If a word has been given a very specific meaning by its writer, you would need to find a particularly compelling justification not to apply the definition exactly as it was written. If you do decide that the context compels the reader to infer an alternative view, it would be as well to acknowledge the apparent conflict and explain the reasoning behind the stance you have taken.

    If a word is defined in a document as having three possible meanings, it is simply ludicrous to say that another meaning can be attributed to it (within that document) because it is “silent on the matter”.

    The argument that a key word should not be given the assigned meaning has been used by a number of posters recently. The “silent on the matter” argument has also been used by the same posters.

    Both positions stem from subjectivity; but appear seek “validity” from a series of ultimately circular arguments that rely on a number of “alternative” interpretations.

    The sheer extent of these alternative interpretations make it increasingly difficult to believe that these posters actually believe what they are writing.

    Their arguments, it seem to me, are no more than spurious contrivances – which effectively say;
    “I don’t agree with the writer’s intended meaning, so I am entitled to assign any alternative meaning to any part of the writing that better suits my position.”


  36. jonnyod says:

    June 24, 2013 at 5:56 pm

    Re the FTT/UTT
    I was under the impression that HMRC ‘s original case was for over 100 EBTs ,81 of which related to players .Now as some have said that the amount taken to appeal was 30 with 5 being admitted as being liable for tax ,so does that mean that the UTT is only looking at 25 cases ,if so what happened to the other 56 cases of player EBTs .
    Were they deemed by HMRC as being legitimate loans and not challenged or were the 5 cases added to them as proven .
    I may be well of the mark here but I cannot remember any reported decision on the other 56
    =======================================

    jonnyod,I think they admitted liability on over 25 cases before they went to the tribunal.
    Can anyone help,I could be wrong.


  37. easyJambo says:
    June 24, 2013 at 4:42 pm

    Sorry but disagree strongly. The tournament is a ridiculous format that requires a 5 night stay – it starts on Wednesday and finishes on Saturday evening, with a day off on Friday, so a squad of say even 25 staying even in a B&B plus travel will not leave you much change out of £10K. And they’ll want spending money for the day off….

    No one is going to give a financial guarantee to a business that’s in administration. On the contrary, Crusaders are more likely if they have any sense to be looking for a replacement – Sevco anyone? – to guarantee the tournament goes ahead.

    It’s a harsh fact of life but that’s business, as David Murray used to say (until of course it happened to him)


  38. valentinesclown says:

    June 24, 2013 at 6:08 pm

    Sorry it is on CH 4
    ============================================
    Brilliant,cant stop laughing.


  39. Valentinesclown
    Are you at the wind up ,the programme thats advertised is ,The man with the 10 stone Testicles,not as it should read ,The man with the biggest brass neck.


  40. jonnyod says:
    June 24, 2013 at 5:56 pm

    Good luck with getting any details on that.

    If you search the press all you will see is reporting of Rangers “winning” their tax case. You won’t get much if anything on the bits they lost.

    That didn’t suit the propaganda.


  41. Tic6709
    If that’s the case what the hell is going on with the LL/MSM in this country .I know their not fooling any on here but talk about not reporting the truth .
    When the dust finally settles on this debacle the newspaper industry in this country won’t be too far behind their favourite teams in their demise


  42. Gaz
    I know the script with the LL but surely even the most stupid among them must realise that it won’t end well .


  43. slimshady61 says: June 24, 2013 at 6:23 pm
    ————————–
    Sorry I can’t agree Slim. I don’t know what financial guarantees Hearts have from the tournament, but if it makes even a single £1 of profit then it is worthwhile. How do you suggest that a club in administration prepares itself for a new season, if it is not allowed to participate in an event that it may actually earn some money?


  44. Tic 6709 says:
    June 24, 2013 at 6:19 pm

    jonnyod says:
    June 24, 2013 at 5:56 pm

    Re the FTT/UTT
    I was under the impression that HMRC ‘s original case was for over 100 EBTs ,81 of which related to players .Now as some have said that the amount taken to appeal was 30 with 5 being admitted as being liable for tax ,so does that mean that the UTT is only looking at 25 cases ,if so what happened to the other 56 cases of player EBTs .

    Were they deemed by HMRC as being legitimate loans and not challenged or were the 5 cases added to them as proven. I may be well of the mark here but I cannot remember any reported decision on the other 56
    =======================================
    jonnyod,I think they admitted liability on over 25 cases before they went to the tribunal.
    Can anyone help,I could be wrong.
    =========================================================
    I haven’t checked with the FTTT Decision but my understanding is here were 108 sub-trusts, five of which were for MGML’s employees. Of the other 103, 22 were for employees of other companies in the
    Group, and 81 for Rangers players.

    There were 5 cases conceded by the Murray Group and I think this was for Rangers players where a guaranteed bonus was paid via trust loans which because of the contractual nature created a tax liability. I think this was the bonus for a CL Match in Famagusta but if you check the Decision you’ll find it. Note the FTTT didn’t find the appellants guilty in these cases as they were just conceded which happens a lot in tax cases.

    However there has always been a lot of confusion over the figures because a number of newspaper and I think in particular the DR made the mistake of including a line number from the FTTT Decision document which I think was 25 possibly 35 and this was wrongly stated to be 25/35 players and I now can’t remember whether these were meant to be cleared or meant to be found guilty but all it was was sloppy reporting.


  45. Gaz says:
    June 24, 2013 at 6:32 pm
    jonnyod says:
    June 24, 2013 at 5:56 pm

    Good luck with getting any details on that. If you search the press all you will see is reporting of Rangers “winning” their tax case. You won’t get much if anything on the bits they lost. That didn’t suit the propaganda.
    ———————————————————————————————————–

    Well the great thing about internet bampots and clatterers is all we need to do is go to the source document and it’s all there and not the twisted version which has gone through the SMSM PR mangle. The Decision and opinion is at: http://www.financeandtaxtribunals.gov.uk/judgmentfiles/j6851/TC02372.pdf


  46. @HirsutePursuit at 6:18pm

    I agree with what you say here, it’s very easy to be tempted to bend the terms of a document to meet the pre-conceived result you are trying to achieve.

    It’s all too easy to be blind to one’s confirmation bias, and ignore arguments or evidence which don’t support the contention we’re trying to make. It needn’t even be deliberate of course, cognitive biases plague the best of us when a position we take is being challenged.

    The sort of faulty reasoning you outline is an example of that, but in the context of interpretation of documents there are others of course:

    Conflating the meaning of a word in one document with its meaning in another because doing so supports one’s argument is a classic error of this type, for example. In the same vein treating a provision with a specific purpose as determinative of another unrelated one is an easy trap to fall in to. Picking and choosing parts of the definition section of a document which support the argument that we’re trying to make, and unconsciously ignoring those which don’t is another easy mistake to make.

    The above is by no means an exhaustive list.

    I think your post is a useful reminder that we should always analyse our own positions critically. We’re all coming at issues with pre-conceived views (whether we admit it to ourselves or not), and our brains are very good at persuading themselves that what we’re reading fits the model they’ve already made.


  47. James Traynor – “He was accused of pocketing the cash two years ago in an article in a French newspaper yesterday.”

    As poorly constructed sentences go, he’s right up there with Lord Nimmo Smith.


  48. Auldheid says:
    June 24, 2013 at 6:16 pm
    Ecobhoy 1.49

    I see where you are coming from and it supports the thought that for this truth to come out the truthseekers in the media any will be from outside Scottish borders and for that reason will find it difficult to gain national interest in what the view as a backwater sport in a backwatet bananas republic on their border.
    I would be amazed if journos are not aware of the stuff but what meaning are the giving it? Is it just a laugh at expense of colleagues exposed or do they appreciate that to laugh and not act simply undermines the very industries – media and football- that they rely on for a living?
    The more serious must realise that by doing and saying nothing they are party to the lies being exposed.
    =====================================================================

    It’s difficult to actually answer the ‘meaning’ of it as I can only form an opinion of journalists I know and what they say. In general there is a deep gloom that the whole print side is going down the pan rapidly and older guys are trying to work-out whether they’ll make retiral.

    The guys and gals I know are the more serious ones who actually still believe in all the right things but they are surrounded by the wreck of an industry where everything is dumbed-down and in-depth investigation is expensive compared to the buttons it costs to use wire-copy. Freelance rates have been cut to ribbons for copy and even exclusives with press photographers in danger of becoming extinct with the lack of work.

    Meanwhile a general decline in staff levels and the overworking of those who are left contributes to a low morale and a survival instinct to keep your head under the parapet.

    A declining industry is not a pretty sight. And lots of journos do harbour grudges in a vague way against internet clatterers and bampots not because they actually truly believe they have destroyed their jobs but they are just part of the menace of the internet.

    Even if the papers manage to start making money from the internet, staff numbers will be really slashed if the print side goes and it will. Just about every paper is struggling and the next kick in the teeth will come from STV which has won the Glasgow and Edinburgh local TV franchises which I think is scheduled to transmit in August.

    Probably staffed by journalism course trainees but the real kicker is the fear over the amount of advertising they will soak-up and divert away from the papers.

    The young are still the young although the more savvy ones see the job as short-term and only good for making contacts for a move into PR/lobbying or whatever.


  49. Flocculent Apoidea says:

    James Traynor – “He was accused of pocketing the cash two years ago in an article in a French newspaper yesterday.”
    ———–

    Did he take the cash and slip it into a copy of L’Equipe,

    and did he do it 2 years ago, or yesterday? 🙂


  50. Evening All ( as George Dixon used to say )

    Echobhoy

    Re the FTT and Tortuous legal thinking.

    Neither the majority view ( which I originally favoured ) nor Dr Poon’s dissenting judgement ( which I now prefer though for reasons over and above the argument she put forward ) are tortuous, Both are perfectly logical and understandable.

    However, one argument has greater legal substance than the other and as i say above I prefer Poon– not because I want that to be right but because on reflection the assenting reasoning is too narrow and makes no sense when faced with a wider view of the law.

    A great debating point over a pint but setting it all out here would result in both arthritis of the fingers and rigour mortis of both eye and brain.

    Re LNS — I appreciate all that you say re what he was presented with, what was conceded before him, and with regard to the scope of his enquiry and finding– however once again I have to say that in light of the appeal, in light of the sworn testimony of SDM, and in light of the SPL rules and the acknowledged sanctions applied in world football let alone Scottish football — the conclusions reached and legalise applied are tortuous — to be frank contrived—- and make no legal sense.

    Now, this may not be LNS’ fault ( although he carries the can as he is the heid cowboy ).

    Bryson’s logic and reasoning– whether accepted by all, not challenged by anyone, presented as an expert or no— is in itself tortuous and contrived.

    The whole concept of there being no sporting advantage in not following the rules is a bizarre approach to take– as elsewhere those same rules are looked upon as either complied with or not and sanctions of the most draconian kind routinely follow.

    Had Nimmo Smith produced his report as an opinion of counsel on behalf of a client, then I for one would have brought him in and questioned him on both interpretation of the facts and rules, and on his assessment of the applicable legal principles.

    Sometimes opinions come in from counsel and you wonder– “What the hell does he/she mean?” and the only way to find out is to talk it through and challenge it vigorously asking at times ” Are you serious? Do you really think you can be right here?”

    Very often, seen from a different– perhaps less closeted and theoretical perspective— counsel would change their mind— then send your their bill for the privilege of having their mind changed for them!!

    lol


  51. ecobhoy says:
    June 24, 2013 at 7:50 pm

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

    People or companies aren’t “found guilty” or “innocent” at a tax tribunal. The appeal is upheld or it isn’t. Often it is partly upheld and partly rejected.

    The point is though that Rangers misused EBTs and this has been determined and agreed upon. The idea of them “winning the tax case” or being found “not guilty” is simply not true. No matte how much they, their fans or the press want us to believe.

    The rest of the matter is outstanding and is no more a finalised than it was before the FTT ruled. It remains under appeal.


  52. Been without t’interweb last 2 weeks, so just catching up. I take it we’ve heard the rumour that TRFC have only sold 17k season tickets?


  53. Araminta Moonbeam QC says:
    June 24, 2013 at 9:26 pm

    I hadn’t heard that.

    Is it from a reliable source, or off the interweb.

    (do you see what I did there)


  54. Araminta Moonbeam QC says:
    June 24, 2013 at 9:26 pm
    Been without t’interweb last 2 weeks, so just catching up. I take it we’ve heard the rumour that TRFC have only sold 17k season tickets?
    —————————————————————————————————————————————
    What do you mean ‘only 17k’?
    Don’t you know that’s a world record for a third tier team in the middle of Insolvency Events!


  55. Word is doing the rounds on that Twitter, but no idea where it originated. 17k seems quite good, given the state they’re in. Will barely cover McCoist’s Greggs bill and Mark Hately’s retainer, though.


  56. I think the news that certain, so called, journalists have been taking ‘a pay enhancement’ to print good news stories is hardly a surprise to anyone however I think a few clubs have already cottoned on to this hence the reason some clubs are announcing their signings via their own websites in the late afternoon and evenings and having a press conference the following day.

    During the evening fans can see pictures and read quotes on their own clubs websites yet the print media have to wait to get their own interviews.

    I think this is just another way in which the MSM are becoming more irrelevant as each day passes. They no longer write the news they write the first version of history. These guys are in serious trouble and I think they know it. They are no longer trusted by the vast majority of fans and day by day their plight becomes worse..


  57. When are the Civil / Sporting Authorities going to diligently professionally effectively address this mess?
    That’s they’re public office duty and publically resourced to do so.


  58. What can AIM do if RIFC don’t produce the statement of accounts that was due 31/5 according to torrejohnbhoy:

    “Today 21:14
    torrejohnbhoy
    RE: financial reports54.50Sell
    This is no rumour.under the AIM rules a company must produce a report within 3 months after its 1st 6 months of accounts. RIFC accounts run from August.Therefore 6 months is February therefore financial report(unaudited is OK) is due the end of May. This report is now late. Why,I don’t know.Rumours etc,I don’t know. What I do know is: This report is late and history shows,for new companies,this is not normally good news.”

    How would one raise this issue with AIM, how long would it take for them to do something?


  59. The accounts being late, and only 17,000 season tickets sold to dat.

    Wishful thinking from some people or things starting to fall apart again.

    Thing is, no one though administration could happen, or liquidation, or failure to get into the SPL as a new club … so just about anything is believable now. Particularly with the things we have been discussing regarding the cash flow, IPO money etc.


  60. 42 2 Rate This

    Neepheid says;

    There is absolutely nothing to stop any journalist formulating and actually asking some questions based on the CF revelations. Why are none of our so-called journalists asking any questions based on this goldmine of material? They don’t have to quote CF, just ask the questions. isn’t that how it works? Get the denials,note them down, get them confirmed. They will surely come in handy later. Come on PhilMcG, AlexT, explain to me the problem? Or is it all just another great big broom, sweeping yet another big heap of stuff under yet another big carpet? For shame! The fourth estate? Protector of our liberty? Bought and sold by the other three estates,

    —————————-–
    Neeps,
    It would appear CF is playing a game of brinksmanship, why else does the material never quite amount to the smoking gun? rather, it is scented to ………..not quite confirm what we all believe to be so. I can understand why journalists are keeping their powder dry, although I find it frustrating. Lets consider a multitude of outcomes here, this is a possible. As CF edges toward SDM and possible nuclear switches, she is certainly calling SDM’s bluff. What if someone, up to their neck in brown stuff, pays him off with a tasty wee 7 digit gratuity, small potatoes if you are ………say servicing a debt mountain which amounts to the best part of a billion (just sayin) …………..just to keep the fall out from engulfing the real big league villains. Part of the deal is that CF publicly outs herself as a mischievous frauster who fed to bam pots everything they wanted to hear just because she could. Such a scenario would leave us defeated and without a shred of credibility and the bears engaging in a sickening display of peacockery, 10 times worse than the post FTT/LNS strutting.

    At various points in this saga, I have scented justice and victory; the ebt’s, the stripped titles, the endless enquiries…..and each time left frustrated as the smirking bears are orchestrated in mass delusion by ‘journalists’ and spokesmen from the Govan club. I trust Thomo, and Philip, if they could they would, but for now they are stalking this story carefully, hopefully pulling at threads that CF has frayed and will, in the fullness of time nail the culprits….on behalf of us all.


  61. Gaz says:
    June 24, 2013 at 10:07 pm
    0 0 Rate This

    The accounts being late, and only 17,000 season tickets sold to dat.

    Wishful thinking from some people or things starting to fall apart again.

    Thing is, no one though administration could happen, or liquidation, or failure to get into the SPL as a new club … so just about anything is believable now. Particularly with the things we have been discussing regarding the cash flow, IPO money etc.

    =======

    The info on season book renewals comes from the ticket office


  62. the taxman cometh says:
    June 24, 2013 at 10:11 pm

    Really.

    From someone with an actual link there, or someone’s best friends mum’s boyfriends aunt who is the cleaner there.


  63. the taxman cometh says:
    June 24, 2013 at 10:04 pm
    ‘..How would one raise this issue with AIM, how long would it take for them to do something?’
    ——
    Just for fun, here is the text ( drawn from your post, taxman) of my email of two minutes ago to the AIM regulator:
    “Dear Regulator,
    I understand the following to be the case:
    “Under the AIM rules a company must produce a report within 3 months after its 1st 6 months of accounts.
    Rangers International Football Club’s (‘ RIFC’) accounts run from August. Therefore its first 6-months accounts period ends February. Therefore a financial report (unaudited is OK) is due the end of May.
    It is now almost end June and no accounts have as yet been made available.
    Is there a reason for this? Is there something very badly wrong?
    I am deeply concerned, and would very much appreciate confirmation from you that the delay has been noted and is being checked out.
    Thanking you in advance,
    Yours,
    Joihn Clarke


  64. john clarke says:
    June 24, 2013 at 10:39 pm

    the taxman cometh says:
    June 24, 2013 at 10:04 pm
    =======================================
    Rangers Accounts

    So what exactly were the accounts that were produced I think to end of December? I’m a bit confused over those because something tells me they might have been not fully audited or unaudited. So is the difference that what is now required is audited ones which require an accountant to actually sign them?

Comments are closed.