News in The Times of Celtic’s letter to Stewart Regan regarding that club’s wish for a Judicial Review into the SFA’s handing of the Rangers EBT crisis increases the pressure on Regan considerably.
The SFA Chief Executive’s ill-advised spat with Pie and Bovril editor David McDonald this week may even be a sign he is devolving, and at least it demonstrates that, despite Twitter disaster after Twitter disaster, Regan doesn’t learn readily from his mistakes.
Also, it appears from the contents of Celtic’s letter that their target in terms of a Judicial Review has been the SFA, and not the SPFL, all along. That chimes with developments as I understand them elsewhere in this process.
Even though it now appears that Celtic and a fan group are seeking a Judicial Review it is by no means certain that it will ever happen.
Having a sound legal basis for it, obtaining standing, and having a reasonable chance of victory are all variables in the equation, and each has to be weighed carefully before progress can be made.
Having said that, if the reason any Judicial Review fails is because of that lawyer-speak we have been subjected to of late, the SFA may yet come to believe that hiding behind legalese is neither in football’s best interests, nor in the interests of the individuals at the SFA who are under fire.
The bottom line as they, is this;
Rangers did acquire an unfair advantage over others by their use of EBTs. The SPL themselves were flabbergasted when Sandy Bryson proclaimed his eponymous ‘imperfectly registered’ doctrine. They all know – everyone in every board room in the country, in every SFA department, in every SPFL office – that cheating took place.
In fact and in spirit.
The jaws of the vice are tightening as we speak. The fans group who are building a case for a Judicial Review give its handle a wee turn every day, and the leak of the Celtic letter to Regan reduces his wiggle room even further.
It is surely now just a matter of time before this ridiculous and infamous chapter in Scotland’s football history is dealt with.
Of course people will accuse anyone who is a Celtic fan, or an Aberdeen fan, or a Dundee United fan (clubs whose rivalry with Rangers is keenest) of partisanship in this affair. That is mere deflection and bears no scrutiny whatsoever.
As a Celtic fan myself, I can’t deny that I am angry at what took place between (at least) 2000 and 2009, but does that mean that as a Celtic fan I have to recuse myself from having an opinion?
And as a former employee of the club, am I excluded from any conversation about the integrity of our game because the club at the centre of the scandal is Rangers? Pull the other one.
SFM, and the wider fans’ movement has been consistently appalled by this sorry chapter over the last six years, but is no kangaroo court. We are not asking for conclusions to be drawn without due process. We see unexplained regulatory anomalies in the processes at Ibrox and Hampden which have never to our knowledge been addressed. We simply wish that they should be.
Further, if my club was at the heart of this nonsense, I think I’d be incandescent with rage that they had allowed me to revel in the joy of winning all those trophies, only to have the achievements cheapened and nullified by their mismanagement. I would regard that as the ultimate betrayal (and Celtic fans can give you a list of club betrayals as long as Mao’s march).
I’d be thinking that those same business practices that apparently had given us so much, had actually caused to fail catastrophically. Having taken delight in the honours, I would have to accept the consequences too.
The SFA, by their corrupt approach to the demise of Rangers, have denied Rangers fans the catharsis that they could benefit from. In fact the authorities’ refusal to deal with the situation in terms of their own rules it has fostered a siege mentality to exist at Ibrox.
This in turn has enabled a series of charlatans, including the current board, to drive the bus in the direction of a brick wall for the last five years.
After the phenomenally successful share issue (something that can’t happen again whilst King is in charge for regulatory reasons), the new Rangers were given seed capital which should have flowered by now with the regular watering of their huge fan base. That £22m, which should have seen the club competing at the top by now has gone, and the potential which existed in 2012 has been diminished severely.
It’s no fun being a fan of Scottish football in the midst of this. But we make a fundamental error if we think that Rangers fans are enjoying it. They are victims in this too, and they have been defrauded by the Murray-era shenanigans, and the circus performers who have been on the scene since then – every bit as much as the rest of us.
The honourable thing (no laughing at the back) for the SFA to do would be to agree to Celtic’s request for a Judicial Review.
If the pressure is turned up another notch or three on the SFA, then maybe we will all get closure, and perhaps finally we can move on.
BORDERSDONSEPTEMBER 29, 2017 at 21:24
Sevco will not go bust! Why would they? 40K plus season books|
————
rfc had 40K plus season books and they did go bust
HomunculusSeptember 29, 2017 at 15:13
BOGS DOLLOX SEPTEMBER 29, 2017 at 13:20 ==============================
They admitted the assets were undervalued when they released negative goodwill in the first set of accounts. It’s as simple and definitive as that.
The administrator lied and cheated. There was never any doubt that the assets would be kept together and who they would be going to. The creditors were cheated, and from Rangers own figures they were cheated out of £20m.
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/sport/13264821.Question_time_on_Rangers__accounts/
“A release of negative goodwill, a gain occurring when the price paid for an acquisition is less than the value of its net tangible assets, of almost £20.5m was recorded in the profit and loss account.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In any other business the release of negative goodwill would be an indication of a sale at undervalue.
For a football club it is different. The “tangible asset” being revalued is the ground which is worth only the land value to a non football buyer (the ragbag of players, history and assets were not purchased by a licensed member of the SPL or SFL – so not a football club – Remember Brechin!).
But to a football “club” owning the Stadium that John Brown played for it is valued at the “rebuild cost”. Hence, the inflated valuation in the first accounts (by which time they were a football club). And it inflated the balance sheet in the Murray years too. It is accounting/valuation sophistry. Nothing more and is not “proof” of a sale at undervalue.
Proof is what I said it was – that there were higher bids in for the “basket” but ways were found to reject them.
John Clark(e)
SEPTEMBER 28, 2017 at 23:57
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
A small point, and most definitely pedantic, but “CW’s ‘Rangers'” merely carried on the chicanery of DM’s Rangers.
causaludendiSeptember 29, 2017 at 22:45
John Clark(e) SEPTEMBER 28, 2017 at 23:57 @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
A small point, and most definitely pedantic, but “CW’s ‘Rangers’” merely carried on the chicanery of DM’s Rangers.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“Chicanery” . Call it for what it was illegality bordering on the criminal.
My humble and rare opinion.
It would seem that there is some common ground between the Firm, old, new, reconstituted, call it as you believe.
Jackson has peddled so much hand fed, prophylactic gruel in his career that both old and new see it for what it is. A tattered ‘stenographer’ penning shorthand, racist of recent, lyrics sung to him by a largesse nondescript of subzero level5.
It’s time to sing the chorus and join the forces, no matter how unbalanced and wipe this guy out of the MSM.
Contemplate how simply and dastardly Spiers (Graham) was removed from his post for daring to type openly and honestly.
Like the Magic Hat, Pedro is being sent for a Burton. No doubt bereft of notice and compensation.
Pedro is not the headline. Jackson is like ‘a sweaty octopus trying to unhook a bra. A bit like watching John Leslie at work’.
No more gruel please sir.
(Nods to Phil & Tucker for the stolen ‘lyrics’)
Reading some of those old newspaper headlines makes me wonder why liquidation was such a fear if it doesn’t mean anything at all as we are now told!
BOGS DOLLOX
SEPTEMBER 29, 2017 at 22:22
=================================
I took the figure from the audited accounts, and described it as a good starting point.
If you disagree with that fair enough.
UPTHEHOOPSSEPTEMBER 30, 2017 at 07:44 21 0 Rate This
Reading some of those old newspaper headlines makes me wonder why liquidation was such a fear if it doesn’t mean anything at all as we are now told!
———–
Ally had the fear.
note to me,reduce file
UPTHEHOOPSSEPTEMBER 30, 2017 at 07:44 Reading some of those old newspaper headlines makes me wonder why liquidation was such a fear if it doesn’t mean anything at all as we are now told
——————————————————————————————————-
More telling is the fact that no retractions have been offered by the SMSM, nor any demanded from Sevconia.
It’s always puzzled me (not really), why Sevco have not sued their sorry *rses, and in one fell swoop, end their money troubles.
I guess they need them onside.
Bogs DolloxSeptember 29, 2017 at 23:52
‘…“Chicanery” . Call it for what it was illegality bordering on the criminal.’
___________
Two not-to-be-forgotten pieces of Chic(k)-anery were the attempts by a certain ‘broadcaster’ to tell us all
a) that Dave King had not been criminally convicted of fraud and
b) that a certain Campbell Ogilvie’s EBT payment was of an amount no more than he would spend on a ‘good night out’
It is something of disgrace that that now ‘retired’ broadcaster should still be getting piece-work at our expense-and still talking mince!
Bogs DolloxSeptember 29, 2017 at 22:22
‘..(.the ragbag of players, history and assets were not purchased by a licensed member of the SPL or SFL – so not a football club – Remember Brechin!).
……there were higher bids in for the “basket” but ways were found to reject them.
__________
And we would be absolute idiots not to question whether and to what extent there was a secret deal or series of deals made between the Administrators, the SFA and CG, which guaranteed the ‘Brechin game’ (‘conditional membership’,forsooth!) and the clearly expected seamless entry into the SPL.
Geez, what a fright Regan must have got when the SPL (bless their tortured consciences, they did ‘right’ at that critical time) knocked TRFC back!
JOHN CLARK
SEPTEMBER 30, 2017 at 11:31
==========================
I’m not sure what you mean JC but Dave King was convicted of fraud. Well it was certainly reported that he was.
https://www.channel4.com/news/by/alex-thomson/blogs/dave-king-deserve-chance-rangers
Dave King is a convicted tax cheat and now wants to own – of all things in the land – Rangers, probably the most tax-toxic sporting institution in Britain.
So given this blog is largely for those outwith Govan, Glasgow – indeed Scotland – it is worth reviewing the Dave King charge sheet.
In August 2013 a 13-year battle with the South African taxman ended with King pleading guilty to 41 charges at Gauteng High Court in South Africa.
HomunculusSeptember 30, 2017 at 12:45
‘..I’m not sure what you mean JC but Dave King was convicted of fraud. ‘
_____
Of course he was!
I was referring to Chick’s chicanery in denying on air that that was the case:it took two letters to the BBC before I got a second-hand apology and an admission that Chick had got it wrong!
I wanted him sacked either for incompetence/ineffectiveness as a journalist ( not researching his facts) or for deliberately abusing his privileged and publicly-paid position on the BBC to spread untruths and support a ‘glib and shameless’ liar.
JOHN CLARK
SEPTEMBER 30, 2017 at 13:25
============================
Got you, apologies for the misunderstanding.
That would be the same Chick Young who said that Campbell Ogilvie’s EBT payment was enough for a good night out.
He is and always has been a disgrace. The spat between him and Traynor in which Traynor described him as something like “Rangers biggest cheerleader” and Young was apoplectic was excellent.
Just listening to Hugh MacDonald on ‘Off the Ball’, trying to tell us that ‘the Herald’ editorial discussions on the ‘saga’ when it first emerged were about ‘where are we going with this story’ in terms of how to establish and verify facts.
That is not my recollection. Did ‘The Herald’ ask any serious questions? Did it do any more digging into backgrounds, of board members, prospective buyers, the crap that CG and the Administrators came out with, etc etc?
Or did it just roll over, in fear of consequences if they acted like a true newspaper than a prop of the ‘establishment’?
It was also noted that the Administrators of RFC 2012 PLC had required the company to advance a facility of £500,000 at completion of the APA to fund a shortfall in working capital for the period 1 to 14 june 2012.The Administrators did not at the time acknowledge in writing the terms upon which funds were being held by the Administrator and the company have not subsequently received any such written confirmation.The board reported that on 4 october the company received a statement of expenses from the Administrators of RFC 2012 plc indicating that the funds drawn down by the Administrators of RFC 2012 plc to settle the costs of the business during the period of 1 to 14 june 2012 had been £355,842.65. However, the statement of expenses indicated costs of £444,864,79 for this period. The company noted that BDO had been appointed as liquidators for RFC 2012 plc on Nov 1 2012. The company was considering the statement of expenses provided and would be writing to the Administrators/Liquidators of RFC 2012 plc following the completion of it’s review.
———
from minutes of meeting 31 oct 2012.(but i can’t get my head round if it’s min of board meeting on 31 oct how can they know about 1 Nov,what am i missing)
with the court case on Wed some interesting things about the Administrators in this pdf file if it loads and you want a read
Homunculus September 30, 2017 at 12:45
I’m not sure what you mean JC but Dave King was convicted of fraud. Well it was certainly reported that he was.
https://www.channel4.com/news/by/alex-thomson/blogs/dave-king-deserve-chance-rangers
In August 2013 a 13-year battle with the South African taxman ended with King pleading guilty to 41 charges at Gauteng High Court in South Africa.
========================
I think there are occasions where we should be careful with the words that we use to describe people and events within the Rangers saga, as those descriptions aren’t always factually accurate.
Despite the court action in SA, Dave King wasn’t actually found guilty of fraud. Had he been found guilty of fraud, then I think he would have served time. The most serious of the 322 charges indicted, including racketeering and fraud, were negotiated away as part of his plea bargain, as the authorities seemed more interested in getting the tax that he owed rather than having him incarcerated.
There is a similar situation with the description of “illegal” EBTs as used by Rangers.
“…… there is no suggestion that any part of the transaction, which comprised the tax avoidance scheme, was a sham. But that is not the point. The elements of the transaction, which I discuss below, were all genuine and had legal effect …….”
Those words, believe it or not, came from Lord Hodge as part of the Supreme Court’s judgement in the EBT case.
All that the SC ruled, was that they rejected RFC’s appeal against the decision of the the Inner House, that monies paid into the Principal Trust should have been subject to PAYE and NIC. The SC also made no judgement on RFC’s or any individual’s actions, during the period that the scheme operated.
Yes, RFC “unlawfully” did not deduct PAYE or NICs from sums deposited in the Principal Trust, but the EBTs themselves were, and always have been, legally set up and operated.
The only acknowledgement we have of malfeasance on the part of RFC or Murray Group was HMRC’s application of penalty charges to the assessments, due to non co-operation and withholding documents. It is disappointing that no-one has been subject to criminal charges, either fraud or tax evasion, in relation to what I see as illegal activities during HMRC’s inquiries.
Cluster OneSeptember 30, 2017 at 20:49
“….(but i can’t get my head round if it’s min of board meeting on 31 oct how can they know about 1 Nov,what am i missing)..”
_________
God forbid that there should have been any ‘retrospective creativity’ in the writing of minutes of meetings that either did not take place at all , or actually all took place on or after 1st November.
I daresay there have in history been instances of Boards of Directors faking Board meetings, or at least, faking the minutes of supposed meetings.
Not that I could possibly wish to imply that anything untoward took place….
And don’t you just love the sneaky ” …..Sevco 5088 agreed to purchase Rangers (my bold) either by way of Creditors Voluntary Arrangement(“CVA”) or by acquiring the assets and business of Rangers…..”
They knew damn fine that thy could not buy Rangers Football Club once the CVA had been knocked back.The best they could do was buy the assets of a club that had ceased to entitled to operate as a football club, and hope to con press and public into believing they Rangers simply had changed hands, as it had done from SDM to CW.
And they allegedly had the foreknowledge and backing of the SFA in developing that plan.
I hope that discussion of this kind of matter will emerge in open court.
The Big Lie that TRFC is the same club as RFC(IL) has gone on long enough. Time it was nailed, together withwhoever was/is responsible for it and for its continued propagation.
And if anyone whosoever is guilty of, oh, say, abuse of office, particularly of quasi-judicial office, let him be impugned, given a fair trial, and then , as it were, hanged at the mercat cross and his miserable carcass burnt on the Castle esplanade!
JOHN CLARKSEPTEMBER 30, 2017 at 21:42
———
It was resolved that. the minutes for meetings held on 02.07.2012 ,07.08.2012.and 31.08.2012 are herby approved by the board and that the chairman is authorised to sign them on behalf of the company.
Don’t know if this is normal practice for a company,maybe they were really busy and could not get the minutes signed at the time
Hope you don’t mind if I give an observation on Pedro Caixinha. In the past week this guy has been getting it full frontal. In fact from the start. Before a ball was kicked. I don’t think this man is a demon nor a fool.
He is criticised right way for saying he had the best squad in Scotland. Which he clearly hadn’t. (He went on to get rid of a huge chunk of them). But in other parts of the world this type of exaggeration is common place and taken with a chuckle. Just trying to talk his players up. Here in Scotland we took it as the gospel truth in intention.
The dogs and caravans saying is common in many parts of the world – the original caravan was camels not big lumps of steel – he would not have been ridiculed for saying that elsewhere. It has a profound meaning for anyone wanting to look it up.
What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas. I heard that about thirty years ago. The problem Pedro has is quite often that of a foreign language speaker – over explaining something. If he had just said what WGS would have said ‘what is said in the changing room stays there, next question’ all would have been fine, but Pedro goes on and on about it in an effort to be most fully understood. It didn’t work. But that is not to say he is a fool.
Perhaps connected to that our local media think he is talking down to them, as if they were fools. I have my own opinion on that but I don’t think that was Pedros intention. So they have turned on him. Allied to that he has decided to stick up to Kenny Miller – a darling of the media – who has ambitions at his age for a management role at Ibrox.
What Dorrans and Miller did in swapping the captaincy would have been a sacking offence for me. How disgraceful can you get? Miller was lucky to get another years contract and GD was given his chance at Ibrox courtecy of Pedro. How ungrateful can you get? If I was Pedro, I would be hurt.
When I saw Pedro Caixinha at Hamilton on Friday night in the dugout all through the match, like a broken man, my heart went out to him. I never thought I would say that about a Rangers manager.
The only time he got out the seat was when Cadias scored his goal. The player made a bee line towards his manager and Pedro reacted with a big smile and a hug. The press reaction? Pedro only reacted in a positive way to a goal scored scored by his countryman.
The guy just cant get a break.
I’m still a Celtic supporter and want us to beat everybody including Pedro and his motely crew, but just trying to look on things from a humanitarian point of view.
BTW, Just in case anyone thinks I think he is a saint, his barring of green boots and saying We Are The People was just pure stupid. No need for that. Glad to see some Celtic players wearing blue boots to hammer the point home. Dignity.
easyJamboSeptember 30, 2017 at 21:10
“Despite the court action in SA, Dave King wasn’t actually found guilty of fraud. Had he been found guilty of fraud, then I think he would have served time. The most serious of the 322 charges indicted, including racketeering and fraud, were negotiated away as part of his plea bargain, as the authorities seemed more interested in getting the tax that he owed rather than having him incarcerated.”
_______
eJ,the main thing , I think, in relation to King , is that by any ordinary use of language he is a convicted criminal who was fined for the crimes that he admitted.
He has a criminal record.
White collar crime is as dishonourable [and probably far more damaging to us all than crimes of violence which, in a sense, affect mainly and immediately the unfortunate individuals who suffer at the hands of violent criminals]
But plea bargaining to drop some charges which, because of poor drafting of the law are difficult and expensive to prosecute, is probably a necessary evil.
I know that you will have read the text of the relevant Gauteng High court judgment. I can’t actually find my copy, and for the benefit of others who may not have read it, I have had to use wiki!
“King eventually reached an agreement with the South African High Court whereby he pleaded guilty to 41 criminal counts of contravening the South Africa Income Tax Act and agreed to pay a fine of 80,000 rand per criminal conviction or 3.28 million rand in total. As part of the deal to drop the other 281 criminal charges he faced, King also agreed that he would pay the Criminal Assets Recovery Account of the South African Authorities 8.75 million rand in compensation. King was originally indicted on 322 counts including fraud, tax evasion and evasion of exchange control regulations, as well as money-laundering and…”
You are absolutely right , of course, that we laymen need to be careful about expressing our ‘suspicions’ and ‘reservations’ as flat-out defamatory statements,or of being so loose in our language and thinking as to appear to be acting in as unprincipled a way as is alleged of those about whose conduct we have grave suspicions.
But we are perfectly entitled to be like Mr Chipp of the South Africa Revenue Service( may he rest in peace) in raising an eyebrow or two when circumstances warrant such action.
EASYJAMBO
SEPTEMBER 30, 2017 at 21:10
==============================
If you think Alex Thomson is wrong when he said “In August 2013 a 13-year battle with the South African taxman ended with King pleading guilty to 41 charges at Gauteng High Court in South Africa.” fair enough.
However I would point out that one doesn’t have to be imprisoned when convicted of a criminal charge. Plenty of people are either fined or are sentenced to “community service”.
Just because someone doesn’t receive a jail sentence does not mean they were not convicted or a criminal charge. A “plea bargain” is about the sentence, not about whether someone is guilty or not.
Cluster OneSeptember 30, 2017 at 22:26
‘..maybe they were really busy and could not get the minutes signed at the time..’
__________________
The Company Secretary was assisted by Miss Sevim Cesim ,who, I believe, was brought in as an assistant to CG, and who later had the privilege of being brought to the airport by no less a personage than oor Ally.
CG is clearly a good belt-and-braces man. Trust nobody and bring your own note-taker, in case of any little disagreement about what was said, or what was decided….
CW preferred, as a younger man, an IT approach:the wee phone that records conversations.
EASYJAMBO
SEPTEMBER 30, 2017 at 21:10
Yes, RFC “unlawfully” did not deduct PAYE or NICs from sums deposited in the Principal Trust, but the EBTs themselves were, and always have been, legally set up and operated.
====================================
Apologies EJ but I have to disagree with this as well.
EBTs by their nature could not be contractual payments. The payment into the trust had to be at the discretion of the employer. The “loan” out of the trust has to be at the discretion of the trustee.
They were not operated legally because the discretion element is clearly not true. The players and their agents negotiated the payments, that by definition makes them anything but discretionary.
They were contractual payments, they were not appropriate to an EBT. The fact that the Supreme Court ruled even more widely than that with regards EBTs does not change that.
Homunculus October 1, 2017 at 00:23 EASYJAMBO SEPTEMBER 30, 2017 at 21:10 Yes, RFC “unlawfully” did not deduct PAYE or NICs from sums deposited in the Principal Trust, but the EBTs themselves were, and always have been, legally set up and operated.
====================================
Apologies EJ but I have to disagree with this as well.
EBTs by their nature could not be contractual payments. The payment into the trust had to be at the discretion of the employer. The “loan” out of the trust has to be at the discretion of the trustee.
They were not operated legally because the discretion element is clearly not true. The players and their agents negotiated the payments, that by definition makes them anything but discretionary.
They were contractual payments, they were not appropriate to an EBT. The fact that the Supreme Court ruled even more widely than that with regards EBTs does not change that.
===========================
No need for apologies or disagreement. You have just explained why the money paid into the trust should have been taxed at source, which I agree with 100%.
All that I was saying was that Lord Hodge made it clear, that the principal trust, the sub trusts and the loans were all set up and operated legally. The issue was with the funds placed in the principal trust, which should have been taxed at source for the reasons you outlined above.
I think you may have misunderstood the point I was making. When you say “EBTs by their nature could not be contractual payments”, the EBTs are not the contractual payments themselves. The problem lies with the money placed in the EBTs, not with the EBT structure itself. e.g. If I deposit some of my taxed income into an ISA, there is no problem. If however I deposit untaxed income into an ISA then I still have a tax liability on that income. There is nothing wrong with the ISA per se.
If RFC had deducted PAYE and NIC, before the money was placed in the trust (contractual or otherwise) then there wouldn’t be a problem, i.e. the EBT principal trust, sub trusts and loans, would all have been above board, and HMRC wouldn’t have been interested
Homunculus October 1, 2017 at 00:07
EASYJAMBO SEPTEMBER 30, 2017 at 21:10
==============================
If you think Alex Thomson is wrong when he said “In August 2013 a 13-year battle with the South African taxman ended with King pleading guilty to 41 charges at Gauteng High Court in South Africa.” fair enough.
However I would point out that one doesn’t have to be imprisoned when convicted of a criminal charge. Plenty of people are either fined or are sentenced to “community service”.
Just because someone doesn’t receive a jail sentence does not mean they were not convicted or a criminal charge. A “plea bargain” is about the sentence, not about whether someone is guilty or not.
==============================
I’m not disputing that King wasn’t guilty of a criminal charge. He was guilty of 41 of them, but fraud wasn’t one of them.
He was still a mendacious witness and a glib and shameless liar, but he wasn’t convicted of fraud. So to say he is a convicted tax fraudster is wrong. A convicted tax cheat perhaps, but not a fraudster. (Alex Thomson doesn’t describe him as a fraudster either, although it could be implied)
What JC missed from his search on the criminal judgement against King was that, in addition to his fines for the criminal offences, he was also required to make a settlement with SARS for his outstanding tax liability which amounted to R707.6m (at today’s exchange rate approx £39M). His payment of taxes therefore dwarfed the fines that were imposed on him for his criminality.
https://www.iol.co.za/news/crime-courts/dave-kings-r700m-sars-settlement-1570326
Having watched a number of games over the last 2 months…it has to be said…the standard of refereeing in Scotland is utterly appalling.
It is appalling for all teams.
Andrew Dallas? Willie Collum? how on God’s good earth do they continually get appointed to the most senior professional games in Scotland?
More than this…they are FIFA listed???
The game on Friday night defies explanation other than to say the referee is utterly incompetent as a professional match official.
Willie Collum at Celtic Park…he should be drug tested…his decisions went beyond the bizarre. There were decisions he made that were wrong under the laws of the game…wrong in application…wrong in execution…and yet I would love to know what the match assessor report detailed. That performance would and should get the official demote.
If there is no fear of punishment for a referee…then what you get is what we saw with Collum and Dallas on Friday…individuals who can carry on being accidentally or deliberately (which is a greater concern) incompetent
These and other performances by match referees I have seen this season are…to be blunt…not fit for purpose.
It tells you all you need to know about the SFA’s referee structure when the Championship, Division one and two have no 4th official on the game?? That is what you would expect at amateur level football.
Thomson and McLean are the two who are better than average…I have yet to see any other Scottish referee who has performed above amateur ability and that sums up the SFA.
As for Mr. Madden…he seems to fall into the deliberate category.
It looks like Kenny Miller isn’t the only one not going to that prestigious tournament in Canada next week.
The Ibrox Statement has more than a whiff of Chris Ze List’s crayon about it with a bizarre reference to Benfica losing to Basel in the Champions League midweek. One can only hope Benfica put out a Statement putting their side of the story and refer to the Ibrox club being unbeaten in the Champions League this year and in two games within a couple of days they held Partick Saint-Germain to draws over ninety minutes.
Does what might have happened in Ontario stay in Ontario?
The Kenny Miller saga should be interesting.
I note the mantra of no player being bigger than the club is being aired but is Mr Miller not permitted to say that he is? Given that Mr Miller is thirty two years older than the club he’s bound to be a tad more developed.
EASYJAMBO
OCTOBER 1, 2017 at 02:28
==============================
It may prevent a circular argument if you were to tell me what Dave King pled guilty to.
It was always my understanding that it was knowingly failing to pay enough tax. That he agreed to plead guilty to that, with a deal that he would pay back the tax plus a penalty, rather than being imprisoned.
However if that is not the case I am more than happy to be enlightened.
EASYJAMBO
OCTOBER 1, 2017 at 02:08
If RFC had deducted PAYE and NIC, before the money was placed in the trust (contractual or otherwise) then there wouldn’t be a problem, i.e. the EBT principal trust, sub trusts and loans, would all have been above board, and HMRC wouldn’t have been interested.
==============================
There also wouldn’t have been a point. Putting it in an EBT earning no interest would have been a bit of a waste. Probably better putting at least some of it in an ISA and earning some tax free interest.
HMRC Wouldn’t have been interested because the tax and NIC would have been paid. The taxpayer could have put the money in a pile and set fire to it and they wouldn’t have cared.
Homunculus October 1, 2017 at 09:42
EASYJAMBO OCTOBER 1, 2017 at 02:28 ==============================
It may prevent a circular argument if you were to tell me what Dave King pled guilty to.
It was always my understanding that it was knowingly failing to pay enough tax. That he agreed to plead guilty to that, with a deal that he would pay back the tax plus a penalty, rather than being imprisoned.
However if that is not the case I am more than happy to be enlightened.
=======================
He plead guilty to 41 offences of contravening Section 75 of the SA Income Tax Act. I don’t know the specifics of Section 75, but I suspect that his tax returns were any of incomplete, incorrect, late etc.
Here is how SA’s National Prosecution Authority reported the sentence agreement.
http://www.politicsweb.co.za/archive/our-sentence-agreement-with-dave-king–npa
Some extracts from Section 75 of the SA Income Tax act
(1) Any person who-
(a) fails or neglects to furnish, file or submit any return or document as and when required byor under this Act; or
(b) without just cause shown by him, refuses or neglects to-
(i) furnish, produce or make available any information, documents or things;
(ii) reply to or answer truly and fully, any questions put to him; or
(iii) attend and give evidence,
(c) fails to show in any return made by him any portion of the gross income received by or accrued to or in favour of himself or fails to disclose to the Commissioner, when making such return, any material facts which should have been disclosed; or
(d) fails to show in any return prepared or rendered by him on behalf of any other person any portion of the gross income received by or accrued to or in favour of such other person or fails to disclose to the Commissioner when preparing or making such return, any facts which, if so disclosed, might result in increased taxation; or
(e) obstructs or hinders any officer in the discharge of his duties; or
(f) without just cause fails to comply with the provisions of section 70A, 70B, 73A, 73B or 73C;as and when required in terms of this Act; or
(g) submits or furnishes a false certificate or statement under section seventy-three; or
(h) holds himself out as an officer engaged in carrying out the provisions of this Act; or
(i) obtains approval of any project as a qualifying strategic industrial project in terms of section 12G of the Act, where such approval was based on any fraudulent information provided or material misrepresentation made by that person; or
(j) without just cause fails to comply with the provisions of section 99, where that person has been declared to be the agent of any other person as contemplated in that section shall be guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to a fine or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding 24 months
(3) Any person who has been convicted under subsection (1) of failing to furnish any return,information or reply, shall, if he fails within any period deemed by the Commissioner to be reasonable and of which notice has been given to him by the Commissioner, to furnish the return, information or reply in respect of which the offence was committed, be guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to a fine of R50 for each day during which such default continues or to imprisonment without the option of a fine for a period not exceeding 12 months.
EJ
If you don’t believe that’s fraud then we will just have to agree to disagree.
@ HOMUNCULUSOCTOBER 1, 2017 at 10:45
“EJ
If you don’t believe that’s fraud then we will just have to agree to disagree”
—————————————————————————————————–
Speaking of fraud, do you think Benfica may introduce the Traverso letter, citing misrepresentation?….Or am I just wishful thinking?….
Corrupt officialOctober 1, 2017 at 12:15
‘..do you think Benfica may introduce the Traverso letter, citing misrepresentation?….’
_________
Benfica might be better suing ‘Elite Soccer Entertainment’ whose promotion of the game carried this misleading statement:
“…Challenging SL Benfica is Scotland’s most decorated club, Rangers F.C. The Rangers have won more league titles and trebles than any other soccer club in the world, winning the league title 54 times, the Scottish Cup 33 times and the Scottish League Cup 27 times. Managed by Pedro Caixinha, the Rangers sit fourth in the Scottish Premiership standings, with 3 wins, 1 draw and 1 loss”
The reference to Pedro shows that they are clearly referring misleadingly to TRFC Ltd founded in 2012.
then again, maybe Elite Soccer Entertainment could sue TRFC for misleading them!
EASYJAMBOOCTOBER 1, 2017 at 10:18
( sorry i never voted to add to your TD)
———–
Are you going for the thumb down cup
SPEAKING OF CUPS.
now that the trip to Canada has been called off and Benfica pulling out, will TRFC be awarded the Eusebio cup?
If they do i can’t wait to watch that video,even better will be the Level5 spin on what an achievement it was
JOHN CLARKOCTOBER 1, 2017 at 12:55
Corrupt officialOctober 1, 2017 at 12:15‘..do you think Benfica may introduce the Traverso letter, citing misrepresentation?….’_________Benfica might be better suing ‘Elite Soccer Entertainment’ whose promotion of the game carried this misleading statement:
———————————————————
As Benfica are not turning up, I doubt they need do anything and the onus would be on others to challenge Benfica. Benfica have a UEFA endorsed “Not guilty” in their defence, so really should be unfazed.
I Believe the Reason Benfica pulled out is Because Under Canadian Law THE Rangers Football Club cannot claim to be Rangers FC as that is Illegal
http://www.slbenfica.pt
Sport Lisboa e Benfica informs that the Eusébio Cup 2017 scheduled to be held with Glasgow Rangers was not possible for breach of the contractual commitments established by Elite Soccer Entertainment, entity promoting this game, within the terms and deadlines set.
paddy malarkeyOctober 1, 2017 at 13:5
‘…http://www.slbenfica.pt..’
_________
I don’t see any reference to the Eusebio Cup game on that link, paddy malarkey.
The Benfica statement doesn’t say who is in breach?
Kilmarnock FC parts company with manager Lee McCulloch
How many managers is that now in scotland that have lost their jobs, and it’s only Oct
JOHN CLARKOCTOBER 1, 2017 at 17:35
Sorry, JC , but that statement was issued by Benfica (poor translation into English) . I think the Eusébio Cup 2017 is/was a one-off game between the two teams , and Benfica appear to be blaming the organisers for their (Benfica’s) withdrawal . Allegedly high ticket prices and low sales .
JOHN CLARKOCTOBER 1, 2017 at 17:35
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/benfica-blame-organisers-rangers-eusebio-11268588?utm_source=Direct
——————-
Rangers have demanded an explanation from the Lisbon side, but Benfica have blamed organisers Elite Soccer Entertainment of Brampton, Canada.
They stated: “The 2017 Eusebio Cup scheduled to be held with Glasgow Rangers was not possible because of a breach of the contractual commitments established by Elite Soccer Entertainment, who promoted this game, within the terms and deadlines set.”
———-
Did mean to post this earlier for you JC but got caught up in things
paddy malarkeyOctober 1, 2017 at 20:10
‘Sorry, JC , but that statement was issued by Benfica (poor translation into English) ..Allegedly high ticket prices and low sales .’
________
Yes, I saw some tickets or rather, a row of twenty , being sold at $200 EACH! on the Elite Soccer Entertainment site.
Cluster OneOctober 1, 2017 at 20:55
‘..Did mean to post this earlier for you JC but got caught up in things’
______
Just saw your post, C1! Thanks.
Unless I missed it, but I was led to believe that September was critical for RIFC/TRFC needing another soft loan of c.GBP3M or GBP4M.
Can anyone add to this…?
A propos the ‘gone into Administration’ Monarch Airways, I heard a BBC Radio (England) commentator make this observation, when asked if another airline might buy Monarch: no, it’s in Administration, and the scavengers will move in to scavenge what they can from the Administration (or words to that effect).
There will be no ”continuity Monarch airline” any more than there is or can be a ‘continuity RFC)’
There are , I’m sure, lots of CG types out there in the airline world. We’ll see whether they will be dealing with Administrators like D&P.
And my personal opinion is that guys who run big companies into Administration at the expense of great numbers of the public should not get off as lightly as they do.
eh, that re-tweeted tweet showing someone comforting a policeman? A Spanish policeman?
I think some words are needed-I thought it was about the Las vegas massacre!
But I don’t think the Las Vegas police have ‘Policia’ on the back of their jackets?
Not to be too political, but I don’t think I support the Spanish police behaviour in Cataluna.
The behaviour of the Spanish Police in Catalunya/Catalonia was abhorrent.
The photo in the retweet is of a member of the Mossos d’Esquadra, hence the support from supporters of Catalan independence.
JOHN CLARKOCTOBER 2, 2017 at 12:53
John, I think there are 3 Police services in Spain and one of them i think are a local force whom I believe were trying to protect crowds from the main police service which we saw in the media. I think, but not entirely sure. Some of the scenes are truly shocking.
ChristyboyOctober 2, 2017 at 14:27
‘…and one of them i think are a local force whom I believe were trying to protect crowds from the main police service .’
________
I was hoping that was the case.Thanks,Christyboy.
I was up very early this morning and heard the news about the Las Vegas massacre. so when I saw the tweet my head was full of that and thought at first it was a distressed Vegas cop! Then I saw the ‘policia’ and wondered!
Sorry if this has already been discussed, HMRC put up a “Spotlight” in relation to disguised remuneration a couple of days ago.
It is effectively an announcement that they will be using the Supreme Court ruling in the Rangers tax avoidance case as a precedent in relation to this type of scheme.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/disguised-remuneration-a-supreme-court-decision-spotlight-41
They specifically make reference to para 39
“In paragraph 39 of the Court’s decision, they set out the principle that employment income paid from an employer to a third party is still taxable as employment income.”
39. I see nothing in the wider purpose of the legislation, which taxesremuneration from employment, which excludes from the tax charge or the PAYEregime remuneration which the employee is entitled to have paid to a third party.Thus, if an employee enters into a contract or contracts with an employer whichprovide that he will receive a salary of £X and that as part of his remuneration theemployer will also pay £Y to the employee’s spouse or aunt Agatha, I can ascertainno statutory purpose for taxing the former but not the latter. The breadth of thewording of the tax charge and the absence of any restrictive wording in the primarylegislation, do not give any support for inferring an intention to exclude from the taxcharge such a payment to a third party which the employer and employee haveagreed as part of the employee’s entitlement. Both sums involve the payment ofremuneration for the employee’s work as an employee.
HomunculusOctober 2, 2017 at 19:55
‘… HMRC put up a “Spotlight” in relation to disguised remuneration a couple of days ago…’
______________
I take it, then, Homunculus, that there was no way in which the EBT scheme could have been legitimately used?
That it wasn’t simply that RFC(IL) had used it ‘incorrectly’ and got caught, but that it could not ever have been used ‘correctly’?
That the ‘pornographer struck-off-lawyer’ had dreamed up a load of mince which SDM, in his cupidity and readiness to cheat, was only too eager to swallow,but whose native cunning told him not mention to the SPL or the SFA that he was making EBT payments not only to his players, but that he had also paid ‘the price of a good night out’ a to a former officer who had left the club and now worked at the SFA?
Looks like the lawyer was crap as a lawyer, however good he was as a stud!
HomunculusOctober 2, 2017 at 19:55‘… HMRC put up a “Spotlight” in relation to disguised remuneration a couple of days ago…’
——————–
This also from a couple of days ago.
The clubs under the spotlight are in the scottish premiership and the premier league and championship down south
This fFom the SFA web-site, caught my eye, while I was idly wondering about the ferocious attention paid by our administrators to lesser clubs
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=1961&newsCategoryID=1&newsID=17242
“Notice of Complaint | Edinburgh University Association FC
Monday, 25 September 2017
Alleged Party in Breach: Edinburgh University Association Football Club
Match: Edinburgh University Association Football Club v Lossiemouth FC, Sunday 23rd September 2017
Competition: The Scottish Cup
Disciplinary Rule allegedly breached: Disciplinary Rule 306 – Team Lines – clubs shall observe the terms of Scottish Cup Rule 22
Principal hearing date: Thursday 12th October 2017
Response date: Monday 2nd October 2017”
Does any one know which terms of Cup Rule 22 relating to Team Lines are alleged not to have been observed by Edin University? (They won the tie)
I do hope it was only something minor, like the ineligibility of a player( which for one club attracts no penalty) and not something major such as absence of one signature!
(No harm to Lossiemouth, of course: but my son turned out for Edin Uni a number ( a goodly number!) of years ago.)
JOHN CLARK
OCTOBER 2, 2017 at 20:46
================================
As I understand it these things are thought up by people as a way to avoid paying tax. There is then an argument between them and HMRC as to whether it “works” or not. Ultimately it is decided in Court and in this case HMRC were willing to take it all the way (bearing in mind that it was actually BDO that appealed to the Supreme Court, but HMRC are the largest creditor and sit on the panel for the liquidation. Yes I do mean what that sounds like).
HMRC got a dream verdict from the Supreme Court. They didn’t just say that the Rangers’ EBT failed. They didn’t just say that EBT’s as a concept failed. They said that disguised remuneration schemes failed.
It’s like we discussed way back at the start of the RTC blog. The tax was due when the payment was made. The trust, loans etc were irrelevant.
Re the pornographer lawyer, he was struck off, that had to be a clue. Re the QC who supported the argument and co-wrote the book. He has been declared bankrupt. One guess which large government department petitioned for that bankruptcy*. Let’s not go into the whole unpleasantness regarding the £500,000, the charity and the bounced £75,000 cheque.
* If you can’t guess click the link below.
https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/2735119
HOMUNCULUSOCTOBER 2, 2017 at 22:55
A tax barrister busted by the tax man…………A perfect example of how much store to place in legal advice.
John Clark October 2, 2017 at 20:46
HomunculusOctober 2, 2017 at 19:55 ‘… HMRC put up a “Spotlight” in relation to disguised remuneration a couple of days ago…’ ______________ I take it, then, Homunculus, that there was no way in which the EBT scheme could have been legitimately used?
That it wasn’t simply that RFC(IL) had used it ‘incorrectly’ and got caught, but that it could not ever have been used ‘correctly’?
========================
I guess the only way round it is for the payments to be for reasons not related to playing football.
One way that EBT use could have been used legitimately would have been for a club, say Rangers, to have funded the main trust in advance, from free funds, and leave it there as an investment.
Then, if there was a later situation where a discretionary payment/loan could have benefited a player/ex player it might have been possible to allocate some funds from the main trust, e.g. a like a Fernando Ricksen who was struck down by a condition where he could have benefited from an ex gratia payment to adapt a house etc., or perhaps a youth player who gets a serious injury and is forced to give up the game is offered access to funds that might help him set up a business or go to university.
Interesting discussion on here tonight over EBT legitimacy (or lack thereof). We’ve been holding off on a new blog in the expectation that there may be something to report on the JR front, however a resolution has remained frustratingly elusive thus far.
Also noticed some very disingenuous (well childish actually) statements on Twitter on the origins of the WhatsApp story that Phil wrote about a few weeks ago.
Emboldened by Trump’s success in telling barefaced lies and ignoring the actual elephant in the room representing truth, one self-styled ‘real’ journalist keeps repeating on Twitter that Phil stole the story from Keith Jackson (yes, that right – no giggling at the front).
Another reminder that the Rangers saga has only served to throw a spotlight on the real problem in our national game – the complete moral and professional bankruptcy of the press, and the systematic failure of leadership of the SFA and SPFL.
It also highlights the desperate – losing – battle for survival the MSM is waging with alternative media outlets.
For the playground bullies of the the MSM on Twitter, a serious problem lurks behind the arrogance, the condescension, and the bluster. That is the terminal decline of trust in the media, and the commensurate fall-off-a-cliff ratings disaster which has seen ‘restructuring’ of newsrooms take place almost as regularly as print editions.
There are those in the media who would like to tell the other side of the story, but they are denied the opportunity to do so by ratings-conscious editors. There are some who would like to elevate the debate to include dissenting voices, but clearly the line which has been agreed is to mount personal attacks on dissenters.
One would have thought that encouraging debate and discussion would be a healthy thing for the media, but in fact the only reason I even know that (for example) there is a debate over whether or not Rangers cheated their way to several honours, or whether or not the SFA helped them get away with it, is when people deny it on TV, on radio, and in the papers.
The war between alternative media outlets and the dinosaurs in the press is all but over. In five years there will be no print media in Scotland. Tighter the money becomes, the landscape becomes denser with Chris Jack types, the circulation dries up even more, and money becomes tighter. Rinse and repeat.
Sadly, people are losing jobs, and will continue to do so, because the press can’t do their jobs, because they refuse to tell the truth, because they are desperate to become part of the establishment that they should be holding to account.
Maybe a better, more honest print media will emerge, Sevco-like, from the ashes of the old. A quick browse through the adolescent e-tagging on Twitter from those ‘real’ hacks does not make me hopeful.
Big Pink @ 02:27
Good observations.
However, the elephant missing from the (S)MSM room you describe is the publicly-funded BBC Scotland sports department. (Affectionately known by many in the bampot community as ‘BBC Shortbread’.)
How might one reasonably account for the absence of honesty and endeavour in Shortbread’s coverage of the Rangers (IL) saga?
On the face of it, the BBC’s sports coverage in Scotland is massively compromised by its wide scale employment of known EBT recipients and apologists.
This manifests itself by its (BBC Scotland’s) abject failure to report objectively on the whole EBT, Res 12, Continuation Rangers, SFA/SPFL obfuscation fiasco.
Since the BBC has no commercial imperative akin to that faced by the printed media, is their sports team in Scotland also beholden to ratings-conscious editors or senior managers?
In my humble opinion, they are plainly failing to serve the licence paying public by not encouraging informed debate and discussion; often even completely ignoring significant breaking news. For example, on their piss-poor coverage of the Court of Session then Supreme Court rulings on the use of EBTs.
Big PinkOctober 3, 2017 at 02:27
‘…….because the press can’t do their jobs, because they refuse to tell the truth, ..’
_____________
BP,my biggest beef against the SMSM is not so much that it did not tell the truth but that they did not even begin to look for the truth!
At the time I first read RTC ( which was not quite at the very beginning) I was simply at the stage of reading what the SMSM was reporting.
I read it with some incredulity and some mild frisson of schadenfreude at what I was ready to dismiss as a temporary embarrassment to ‘Rangers’ which would be resolved. I think I even believed ( or did not immediately dismiss as fantasy) Radar’s ‘wealth off the radar’ nonsense.
Like many people of my generation, I still believed then that at least the ‘serious’ papers and certainly the BBC still checked their facts, or at least, still asked questions, and did not act as unpaid propagandists.
As the RTC blog developed, we all saw just how deficient OR partisan the SMSM and in particular BBC Radio Scotland were/are.
Instead of probing and questioning, and interviewing and finding ‘sources’ (and God knows, there seems to have been plenty of sources of leaks available) in order to check out actual, provable facts, they settled for being PR folk, and continued in that role even to the point of assisting in the propagation of the Big Lie.
We now all know what the facts are: a football club fielded ineligible players for decade or more.
It did not suffer the appropriate penalties for that.
Like Monarch airways, it subsequently went into Administration.
‘Scavengers’ bought some of the assets.
The SFA , secretly, ( and we don’t yet know all the details) agreed to let these ‘scavengers’ found a football club, and pushed hard to get that club admitted into a league, so that it could be granted a place in the SFA.
And they created/fostered the lie that somehow that new club is the record-achieving club that is languishing currently in Liquidation.(There will be no ‘Monarch Airline’ other than the one that will be liquidated!)
The sheer affront to commonsense is almost as offensive as the affront to us all.
And the fact that there was not a Press outcry at the terrified refusal of the SFA to open itself to investigation is a disgraceful indictment of those in our society who claim to be journalists.
Oh for some Watergate hero!
There is not one to be found.
No editor, no individual journalist (even the ‘good ones’ won’t break ranks ), and certainly not the BBC “Sportsound TRFC Supporters’ Club” will get stuck into the story and chase and harass people until they get to the ‘Truth’-and not what they or any guilty people wish to portray as the Truth and/or are paid to pretend to be the Truth.
BIG PINK
OCTOBER 3, 2017 at 02:27
Also noticed some very disingenuous (well childish actually) statements on Twitter on the origins of the WhatsApp story that Phil wrote about a few weeks ago.
Emboldened by Trump’s success in telling barefaced lies and ignoring the actual elephant in the room representing truth, one self-styled ‘real’ journalist keeps repeating on Twitter that Phil stole the story from Keith Jackson (yes, that right – no giggling at the front).
————————–
I wonder who told the ‘real’ journalist (I don’t tweet & have no idea who that is, BTW) that the story was actually a Keef exclusive?
Couldn’t have been ****h ******n himself, could it?
Shirley Knott!
Dunderheid @ 09.12 3 Oct – great post – I have long stopped listening to Sportsound & its revolving door for ex Ibrox tax avoiders (& bankrupts) – there must be an agenda set (by an editor) to maintain a constant reference to the club out of Ibrox – how to get change on this matter with the BBC I dont know but yesterday I got my TV Licence renewal notice to rub salt in my wounds !
Just this minute saw my first sighting this yer of the geese heading south!
Very overcast and very windy, three separate skeins of about 30 in each were making heavy weather of battling south against strong cross winds. I could see them clearly all being in a body blown off course repeatedly , but repeatedly trying to angle themselves to try to find a way to use the wind stay on course.
Great sight as they headed towards the Pentlands at Hillend.
Sorry about being OT but I always look forward to my first sighting : there’s sad but paradoxically uplifting about it.
Carry on, chaps.
One for the court reporters ?
LORD TYRE – N Marchant, Clerk
Wednesday 4th October
By Orderbetween 9.00am and 10.00am
P115/17 Note: RFC 2012 Plc for orders under para75
Shepherd & WedderburnWright Johnston & Mackenzie LLP
BIG PINK
OCTOBER 3, 2017 at 02:27 …
It also highlights the desperate – losing – battle for survival the MSM is waging with alternative media outlets…
============================
I’m sure few will have any sympathy when they do close their doors for good.
Most Bampots [?] have been left gobsmacked about how the RFC/TRFC saga has been non-reported / misreported – and, tax aside – it’s mostly ‘only’ footy related.
And it does make you wonder if the population has always been misled by the SMSM – and about serious topics. It’s just that we now know, and are now making informed choices about where we source our news from.
The SMSM paper circulation figures have been falling for years – yet the rags have stubbornly stuck to their failing agenda.
In any ‘normal’ business with significantly falling revenue, changes would be made about all aspects of output to try to stem the decline.
But not one paper, IMO, has even tried a different tack wrt anything SFA/SPFL/TRFC related.
Maybe the SMSM is just stoopid ?
StevieBC – your comment about the MSM being stoopid reminded me of theis Farside cartoon.
All this talk of the media brings me nicely to Sportsound last night. Kilmarnock were taking a real kicking from Tom English for not allowing their employee Kris Boyd onto the show to talk about another of their employees, Lee McCulloch, having his contract terminated. I wonder if Mr English would be allowed by the BBC to publicly discuss the sacking of another BBC employee live on air? Personally I doubt it very much. I doubt very much if any of us in employment would be permitted by our employers to publicly discuss the sacking of another employee. Oh, and for the record Mr English described Rangers as ‘a great club’ on the same show. I bet Kilmarnock wish they had stolen tens of millions from the taxpayer, then they too might have received the same adulation. After all, according to Mr English there is something in Ibrox which looks, walks, and quacks like the duck that was there before, so therefore it is the same duck. It follows therefore it has the same unpaid tax bill.
I may need a hand with this one.
The banners covering the corners of the main stand at Ibrox have been taken down.
Supporters were unhappy the iconic glass staircases were hidden from view when the banners first went up back in August.
While many assumed this was to cover construction work, the club’s supporter liaison officer revealed this was not the case, prompting many fans to question the board’s motivation.
Rangers have now said in a statement they are pursuing extra revenue through sponsorship and advertising, and covered the glass stairwells to “highlight the potential” for companies to possibly use in future.
———————
A question or two if i may?
The supporters were unhappy the glass staircase were hidden from view.so the club removed the banners that had a big crest and club colours on them.
But in a statement they say they covered the glass stairwells to “highlight the potential” for companies to possibly use in future.
Will the fans still not want these sponsorship and advertising,banners removed in the future as the iconic glass staircases will again be hidden from view ?
Or is this just more Level 5 nonsense,or did the banners blow away in the recent winds?
A simply gorgeous moment for regular shortbread listeners tonight following on from the discussion above. In a recorded interview with Johnathon Watson (I assume of only an excuse fame, I missed the start) he was asked, oddly, what his favourite (away?) game was. He plumped for Rangers Marseilles in 92 and you could vividly imagine the producer settle into his armchair as the tales of wee Coisty, wee Durranty, wee Hatelyey spewed forth.
As if required, my imaginary producer eggs on interviewer Macintyre “go on son, get to the cheating son, won the CL by default n’that…”. Kenny duly obliges and the conversation turns to Bernie Tapie and his indiscretions.
“Oh I quite agree” says Jonny and then launches into a quite wonderful tirade about stripping titles just like those cheating athletes…
GGARRRROOOOGAH goes my imaginary producers klaxon as he spits out his beverage launches himself from his seat and ushers Kenny onto Ian Macall discussing Ayr Utd vs QoTS.
Very funny. One wonders if sidekick Tony Roper put him up to it.
paddy malarkeyOctober 3, 2017 at 13:31
‘..One for the court reporters ?
LORD TYRE – N Marchant, Clerk Wednesday 4th October..
_____________
I’ll be there, paddym.
I’ve been re-reading Para 75, and putting bets on with myself about which of these four possibilities BDO is founding its action on:
“An application under sub-paragraph (2) must allege that the administrator—
(a)has misapplied or retained money or other property of the company,
(b)has become accountable for money or other property of the company,
(c)has breached a fiduciary or other duty in relation to the company, or
(d)has been guilty of misfeasance.”
The really, really, really annoying thing is that those who make the laws relating to finance and business sure as hell look after them what breaks those laws.
Doesn’t matter a bugger which of those sub-paras someone might be found to be in breach off, there’s no possibility of a jail sentence! Just bloody fines or restitution , and no doubt folk who work in those areas always make sure their company has insurance cover to pay their costs and fines!
Since neither RFC(IL) nor TRFC is a party, I don’t suppose there will be any reporting restrictions?
JOHN CLARKOCTOBER 3, 2017 at 20:08
I may be way out, but I thought RFC 2012 plc was the name Craigie boy changed RFC plc to before dispatching them to liquidation