Many years ago, I read an article in some legal magazine or other which, to my mind, pointed out something that I had always presumed was obvious.
Namely, that unlike his English Counterpart, the Scottish solicitor is not just a drafter and processor of legal documents, he ( or she ) is a man of business who furnishes advice, and as often as not, will recommend a course of action – possibly involving many different steps or procedures- in any given situation.
Without going into an academic analysis of what this means, may I suggest that a simple definition is that the Scottish solicitor does not always simply do what they are told but will furnish the client with advice for, or against, a certain course of action.
The same applies to accountants and other professionals in my experience. When discussing any business situation, the client should always be aware of the pros and the cons. From there he or she makes a decision based on the advice given – which advice may be taken or rejected.
That is how things work.
If you think about what I have said above, then it follows that one of the principal things an adviser should do for any client, is to suggest a course of action that keeps the client out of court.
Court is a place of last resort. Litigation of any kind is expensive, brings uncertainty, is time consuming and acts as a barrier to unfettered and uninterrupted business planning, strategy and progress because no one can ever be sure of the outcome or the consequences of a court case.
In olden days, court meant choosing your champion to fight against your adversary’s champion. If your guy knocked the other guy of the horse and killed him outright with the lance then you won. It didn’t matter if your guy was also hit with your opponents lance and died a week later as a result – you were still the winner because the other guy died first.
Eventually, society did away with such courts and replaced them with courts of law and the men and women with wigs and gowns as opposed to the lance.
However, you can still win a court battle and suffer a fatal defeat as a consequence.
That is why a court of law should always be regarded as a place of last resort. No one should ever set out on a course of action which runs a high risk of ending up being disputed in court.
Sometimes, of course, a court action is inevitable. On other occasions, people adopt a course of action where the risk of things ending up in court is seen an as an acceptable risk.
This morning’s Daily Record ( and indeed yesterday’s edition ) is spouting David Murray’s mantra that HMRC knifed Rangers but adds there are no winners here. How very MSM. How very lacking in business understanding or searching for the truth.
So, let me explain something.
When you sit down with a firm of accountants who specialise in aggressive tax avoidance schemes such as an EBT scheme or a DOS scheme, one of the things that are spelt out to you is that the scheme you are about to embark upon may well be, indeed is likely to be, challenged in a court of law. Especially if you do not administer it to the letter.
Often as not, the client will be asked to sign up to a contract which specifies that the client will pay hefty fees to lawyers and accountants for setting up the scheme and that fee will include a contribution towards legal fees arising in the event of a legal challenge to the scheme.
That is stipulated at the very outset. You pay £x in advance because you know you are likely to be sued. You also get the benefit of advice which is designed to ensure that your scheme is absolutely watertight in terms of the law, but crucially, there is a rider which states that in the event that the court rules against you then the accountants or lawyers will not be held accountable as you are entering into the whole process knowing that there is a big risk of litigation – and you are told in writing that while you shouldn’t lose, you might lose.
This too is the way it works.
The business advisers will not want litigation, but from the outset they will cover their backs and make it plain to the client that if you sign on the dotted line for an aggressive tax avoidance scheme then you can expect HMRC to take you to court.
Accordingly, the protestations screaming out from the Daily Record this morning about how HMRC killed Rangers are balderdash and bunkum of the highest order.
HMRC did not knife Rangers, they did exactly what was expected of them in the circumstances and the people at MIH knew that the day they started off on any one of their tax avoidance schemes.
Taking the risk in the first place killed Rangers or Rangers PLC if you prefer.
However, the events of yesterday and the day before throw up some other matters worth considering and remembering.
The first is the woeful state of the Rangers accounts by 2005 when there had been yet another share issue underwritten by David Murray. Those accounts showed Rangers PLC to be in a shocking financial state, despite all the rhetoric and dressing from the Directors and the Accountants.
More or less immediately Murray chose to put the club up for sale as it was obvious that the financial traincrash could simply not continue.
However, despite years of searching no buyer could be found.
Further, it should also be remembered that Rangers PLC knew all about the small tax case long before Craig Whyte came along. Those liabilities stemmed from around 2001 but at no time during the Murray era at Ibrox did Sir David put aside the money to pay a bill which no one at Rangers disputed as being due at any time.
Whyte stressed the need for this to be paid long before he ever got the keys to the Marble Staircase, but it wasn’t and there can be only one of two reasons for that.
Either Sir David just didn’t pay the bill concerned ….. or he couldn’t!
The fact is that long before Craig Whyte appeared David Murray could have paid that bill or reached an agreement to pay that bill. However he didn’t and for a period of several years he simply decided he wanted out …. Needed out ….. at any cost!
There is no doubt that he gambled hard and fast with Rangers Football Club, and their finances and their supporters loyalties. He knew , or ought to have known, well in advance that a prolonged and regularly used aggressive tax avoidance scheme, legal or not, was bound to attract the adverse interest and attention of HMRC.
Sir David Murray has been lauded up and down the country for his so called business acumen and business knowledge. He was knighted for the same and received all sorts of unprecedented backing from banks and other institutions.
Does anyone reading this really believe that such a man did not have the foresight, or the advisers around him who had the foresight, to see and know that a large and prolonged dispute with the revenue authorities may well have an adverse effect on the viability and sellability of his business?
Such a suggestion is simply not credible.
Further when the HMRC interest came, Murray’s men, if not Murray himself, did their very best to try and hide the existence of the scheme, the documents surrounding the scheme, the details of the scheme and the intention of the scheme.
They hid all this away from HMRC, The SFA, The SPL and anyone else in authority, with the result that those authorities and bodies had no option but to run to the courts, set up tribunals and convene formal hearings.
When someone does not tell you the truth, starts hiding documents and obfuscating that is the way it works.
However, that is not all that yesterday brought.
The news that Collier Bristow have apparently agreed ( through their insurers no doubt ) to pay the liquidator of Rangers some £20M shows that taking into account the litigation risk, someone somewhere thought it worth making a payment to make a bad situation go away.
Imagine that? What bad situation could that be?
Would it be that somehow or other, creditors, officials and all sorts of other people were misled by a leading firm of solicitors in relation to the affairs of Rangers PLC? Could it really be the case that things were so bad financially at Ibrox, that the only way for even Whyte to be able to get the sale to go through at the princely sum of £1 plus the official bank debt was to have his people mislead funders and eventual creditors?
What does that say about David Murray’s stewardship and the absolute urgent need to get Lloyds TSB out of the picture? Was there really no one else or no other way to take on the debts of Rangers PLC? Apparently not — and that can only be because someone chose to gamble with the finances of the club and leave it in a precarious state.
I am told that when Lloyds took over that account they expressed amazement at how MIH and Rangers PLC were allowed to run up the debts they had with HBOS. Apparently there was incredulity at some of the figures and covenants.
So , when we read in the Record this morning that the HMRC Big Tax case inadvertently brought down Rangers it is very easy to overlook the debt due to the bank, how it arose, the sums due to the same bank through MIH, the extent of the sums due, the banks attitude and the possible attitude and course of action had Whyte not taken them away.
Remember that the same bank stepped straight into MIH and began selling off its assets, and that low and behold the same management team who engineered the EBT scheme have openly admitted that there is an unexplained shortfall in the employees’ pension scheme of over £20 Million.
Do you think the employees who have lost out on pension provision are the slightest concerned about whether the tax avoidance scheme funds and their use are legal or not ? – or do you think they might argue that the money used for these so called “discretionary payments” should have been used to fund a proper legally constituted pension scheme which the company and its directors undertook to pay into under contract?
There is still substantial debt due to Lloyds by MIH and part of that debt is the amount by which David Murray and MIH underwrote and guaranteed that last share issue of Rangers PLC in 2004/2005. The principal sum due under that guarantee ( excluding interest and charges ) was greater than the principal sum claimed by HMRC in the big tax case.
Go figure.
However, this saga is far from over especially with regard to “contractually due” severance payments which look as if they will come back to the FTT in the event of the parties concerned not reaching agreement on the tax allegedly due.
Now, this is interesting because apparently there are a number of documents in existence which show that certain players received a payment of £x at the end of their contract as part of a severance deal.
At the time these were made, my recollection is that under normal severance agreement legislation the first £30,000 would be tax free but after that any sums were taxable.
The FTT has never been asked to rule on these payments, and has never heard any evidence about the legality or otherwise of paying these sums gross of tax into an offshore trust. All of that may yet be to come.
However, the most interesting part of this for me is that further court action may be taken in relation to these matters failing agreement between HMRC… and whom?
Rangers PLC ( the employer ) is in Liquidation so perhaps HMRC might claim some of the money from the Liquidator who has just received the £20M from Collier Bristow – then again it could well be that Ticketus have something to say about that.
In his last statement about MIH, David Murray openly proclaimed that the company was all but finished and revealed the pension shortfall and so on – so I doubt if any agreement of any meaning will be reached there.
That then leaves those who supposedly benefited from the contractually due severance payments – namely the players.
Maybe, in the absence of a now defunct employer, they will be asked to cough up the tax.
No doubt they will all go and consult their lawyers and accountants – the men and woman of business – who will give them their best advice – but you can bet your bottom dollar that any such advice will include a paragraph or ten which starts something along the lines of “ However, here is the potential risk in the event of you deciding to …………. “
That is the way it works……. And always has done.
North Lanarkshire Derby, Good game to start the season. The Rovers seem to have a good management team. Darren Young and Sandy Clark, a mixture of youth and experience.
Iron Men from the Iron Burgh
John Clark says:
July 26, 2014 at 2:23 am
—————————————
You are in no minority of one, John. Thoroughly excellent post.
Sadly, the quest for integrity has been painted as a witch-hunt by the professional dissemblers of the SMSM and the fans of whom you speak have become ever more entrenched in their victimhood just as we become ever more insistent that justice be done.
Both sides are now careering around in a feedback loop that will only be undone by a ruling from Uefa that Rangers 2012 is indeed a new club and the Scottish football authorities strip the old Rangers of the trophies that were won during the unsporting AND illegal DOS days. If that is not done, I fear the walkaway from the sport that will occur when Sevco regain their rightful place, triumphant and unrepentant, may be terminal for the Scottish game.
The portrayal of poor duped Sir David has already made me swither.
Torquemada says:
July 26, 2014 at 10:33 am
10 2 Rate This
John Clark says:
July 26, 2014 at 2:23 am
—————————————
You are in no minority of one, John. Thoroughly excellent post.
Sadly, the quest for integrity has been painted as a witch-hunt by the professional dissemblers of the SMSM and the fans of whom you speak have become ever more entrenched in their victimhood just as we become ever more insistent that justice be done.
Both sides are now careering around in a feedback loop that will only be undone by a ruling from Uefa that Rangers 2012 is indeed a new club and the Scottish football authorities strip the old Rangers of the trophies that were won during the unsporting AND illegal DOS days. If that is not done, I fear the walkaway from the sport that will occur when Sevco regain their rightful place, triumphant and unrepentant, may be terminal for the Scottish game.
=========================================
The only time I really considered walking away from the game was in the event that the new Rangers were allowed to directly enter the top league. I really did think that would have been the end for football in this country. Even leaving the arguments for both tax cases and player registration aside, I failed to see how a liquidated club owing ten of millions, including over £20M to the taxpayer, could be deferred to in this manner while leaving one ounce of integrity within the game. Thankfully the majority of all the fans of all the clubs agreed, not because of some new found unity, but simply because they recognised what would have been decent and what would not.
The sores within the game will never heal in my lifetime though, not as long as the new Rangers and its support fail to acknowledge that any wrongdoing took place. How we can ever get closure on this is beyond me. The SFA and SPL had their chance and blew it big style, by blinking first.
Without wishing to continue the debate about the twitter troll, I would like to bring up a distinction that might help us work out what should and should not be commented on here. The troll, disgusting though he is, is essentially unprivileged. His voice carries no weight even if the shocking content of his message renders it more substantial.
The mainstream media, broadcasters, personalities and, to a lesser extent, leaders of associations and online blogs are in a privileged position to get their message heard above the din. These are the people who need to be monitored and, when found lacking, criticised, and they would like nothing more than for us to be distracted from that by the noise thrown up by social media.
Torquemada says:
July 26, 2014 at 10:33 am
———————————————
I agree.
Rangers as they were known then played players through the DOS and accepted the HMRC verdict and did not appeal therefore guilty of playing at least 2 players (Flo and Moore) illegally over a period of time. Can anyone remind me why this was not punished to this day. I understand that the licence to play in CL has been challenged, but not by the people who should have challenged it i.e. the SFA or at least be investigated or reported by the SMSM. Our game is corrupt is that the simple answer? Do we have to as fans accept that our governing body is corrupt and will always have a bias to one team until the death. Maybe the SFA should be liquidated but then again that does not mean they are dead in Scotland. Our SMSM is biased to one team (or the same values of an old club reincarnated in another simliar club in blue that plays at Ibrox) Is this how sport should be played, ruled over and reported?, because that is what is happening in front of our eyes and our club’s eyes.
Is this the price we have to pay to maintain a certain fabric of our society for a certain amount of the population..
The BBC reported this morning that the demand for Tunnocks tea cakes has risen by 62% since their exposure at Celtic Park on Wednesday.
Know of anyone looking for a sponsor ???
Valentines clown, the illegal payment of those players was accused and admitted, therefore guilt has been established. However, registration issues with those players, which would give rise to football sanctions, has not been tried and proven yet- off the top of my head this is what Auldheid has been pursuing. No matter how strong the case may appear, innocent till proven guilty is still an important principle. That is why it has not been punished yet. I’d definitely agree that a football prosecution should be brought, and I’d also agree that on the face of it it appears that such a prosecution should be successful, nonetheless Rangers remain innocent until proven guilty in that particular case.
It seems that the further we move away fromg ground zero when Rangers were liuidated the more that relevent information seems to fade into the darkness.Lots of crucial points like Rangers not being pursued for fielding inneligable players etc now seems to have been glossed over as the establishment and the SFA/SPL/SPFL all hoped it would. Some people in high places are banking on saying nothing for a few years and hoping it is all forgotten about. Or worse. Trying to convince us all that nothing really happened.Time is a great healer and the longer this goes on without proper action being taken then more relevent information will become hazey and then forgotten.It’s the way it works.
RyanGosling says:
July 26, 2014 at 12:04 pm
I’d definitely agree that a football prosecution should be brought, and I’d also agree that on the face of it it appears that such a prosecution should be successful, nonetheless Rangers remain innocent until proven guilty in that particular case.
========
Well they will clearly remain “innocent” for ever, since the SFA, with Ogilvie at the top, will never have the case heard. So you pay the head of the regulatory body £90k as a “loan” when he leaves your employment, the regulatory body then refuses to investigate, or take any action whatsoever regarding admitted payments to players where tax was evaded, so what are we onlookers supposed to conclude from that? Innocence? It beggars belief, is my conclusion.
RyanGosling says:
July 26, 2014 at 12:04 pm
=============================
Innocent until proven guilty is fine, and is what justice in this country is founded upon, despite the occasions people are wrongly convicted in a court, as history has proven.
In a criminal case the Police will notify the Procurator Fiscal who will decide if there is enough evidence to proceed. I accept the Rangers case is not a criminal case but in terms of the DOS payments we have to ask why the ‘Police’ are unwilling to press for a ‘trial?’ People can hardly be faulted for thinking the lack of pressure to take that particular case to ‘court’ for thinking it is because there is a huge chance guilt would be proved in the ‘court’, given the evidence already admitted by the suspect.
RyanGosling says:
July 26, 2014 at 12:04 pm
” However, registration issues with those players, which would give rise to football sanctions, has not been tried and proven yet- off the top of my head this is what Auldheid has been pursuing.”
——————————————–
Auldheid has been picking away at this amongst other things. Concerning registrations, he is querying how the ‘no sporting advantage gained’ conclusion can be valid when the DOS scheme had already been ruled in contravention of tax law.
On the wider topic of incorrect registration, the LNS tribunal did find against Rangers and fined them £250,000. One of the main reasons for the insignificant fine was that the mis-registration had been an administrative error. However anyone with even a superficial knowledge of the circumstances would recognise that mis-registration was a deliberate ploy and part of an aggressive tax avoidance strategy.
If justice was to be seen to be done then this flouting of the registration rules would have attracted eye watering sanctions that would legitimately have included title stripping. If, due to the sheer catastrophe for the game’s public image, title stripping were to be avoided then the only logical conclusion would have been to levy a fine of such eye watering proportions that no club would be tempted to emulate this strategy. Unfortunately the club concerned was falling into liquidation and any such fine would fall on the poor creditors who might justifiably argue the point that ‘they have been punished enough’.
I don’t know what you do if an association member brings disgrace upon its sport to the point that its deserved punishment is too great to levy. Logically they would attract the ire of supporters and governors alike and placed in the dog house for a very considerable time. To date only one of these groups has been able to stand by its principles.
John Clark says:
July 26, 2014 at 2:23 am
An outstanding post – I particularly like this:
“RTC, and this blog, have not been, and are not ‘anti- Rangers’. They have been, and are, anti- corruption of the sporting ideal by the administrators of our game or by knights of the realm.”
For all the reasons outlined in JC’s post the cards are stacked against justice being done in the form of complicit authorities and compliant media.
Yet, just occasionally a determined chipping away by a small number of people can cause a dam to break – the best example I can think of is phone hacking – victims sued and managed to get court judgements forcing disclosure of evidence.
The UTTT is a huge blow. Why is it only Dr Poon who can see the obvious. If it walks like a tax evasion scheme, talks like a tax evasion scheme it is a tax evasion. FFS, I am so disappointed and annoyed by this outcome.
But, and it is a big but, thanks to JC (and others) we have a measured and considered account of the whole process. How many thousands on here have read this and then told others all bout it.
Auldheid, and others are pursuing the euro licence and LNS.
Eddiegoldtop seems as mad as hell about the whole shenanigans and has got his club on side.
The only way those at the top can defend their lies and deceit is by more lies and deceit. But, as they fob off first one person, then another group that great mountain of lies will become more unstable under its own contradictions.
The justice that JC and everyone else wants will likely be a long, long haul and I have always thought of it as an outside bet.
The game changer could be a “second” insolvency event. I know, I know, “first”, but I’m looking at this from others perspective. If admin costs TRFC promotion this season then GW’s (optimistic) plans are in tatters.
If it is worse and TRFC fail to complete the season then they surely take Regan, Doncaster et al down with them.
Lastly, in the meantime, those in power will hope that if they can hang on long enough “it will blow over”, that TSFM will fade away and be no more.
So, this is heartfelt plea to all. Communication via the written word can be tricky. A criticism of someone’s post, that face to face could be softened by body language, facial gesture or followed by a kind word is instead, just a criticism sitting on a screen in black and white when put in writing.
Posters in this community should be forgiving and tolerant of others who posts are not to their liking and sometimes be prepared to let things go.
In my opinion this blog needs everyone including posters such as Eco and Twopanda. It is easy for disagreements to become falling outs particularly in slow periods.
Hang together and that dam may just burst one day.
In the eyes of the law a man (or woman) is innocent until found guilty. That doesn’t mean he is innocent before being found guilty, as a guilty man is guilty, regardless, as soon as he commits the crime (or wrongful act), it’s just that he cannot be punished, by law, until/unless found guilty. Jimmy Saville will never be found guilty of any crime, doesn’t mean he never committed any, and doesn’t mean he was innocent of any of the crimes for which there now seems overwhelming evidence of his guilt. Unlike Saville, though, it would be very easy to prove Rangers innocent, if that is the case, of mis-registering Flo and Moor, and actually in everyone involved’s best interest, as the paper records are there to be examined. There can be only one reason why they were removed from the perameters of the LNS enquiry, and it wasn’t that they were innocent.
We all know they were guilty of mis-registering the players, they cannot, however, suffer any penalty until found guilty by a tribunal or some other body with the power to do so. It will take a massive change in the integrity of those running football for that to happen. Innocent until proven guilty only exists in a world where justice is sought.
Oops, something’s changed on TSFM 😯
Nice layout 😀
oddjob says:
July 26, 2014 at 11:51 am
9 0 Rate This
The BBC reported this morning that the demand for Tunnocks tea cakes has risen by 62% since their exposure at Celtic Park on Wednesday.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Nae wonder
Anybody that likes Teacakes would jump at the chance of eating one 3ft in diameter
Normally in a google world the first synonym that comes up for evasion is avoidance… Nuff said..!!
@Goosygoosy I would dive right in mate…. Shout out to Tunnocks who regularly backed my last boy’s team and for having a great range of biscuits…
@Neepheid CO has 90,000 reason to shut his gob..!! Ask him about his rangers shares when at Hearts, transferring to his wife is also agin the rules..
JimBhoy says:
July 26, 2014 at 2:29 pm
0 0 Rate This
@Neepheid CO has 90,000 reason to shut his gob..!! Ask him about his rangers shares when at Hearts, transferring to his wife is also agin the rules..
===========
There are loads of questions that Ogilvie should be asked, but for some reason, not one single journalist in the whole of bonny Scotland is prepared to put those questions to him, and publish either the answers, or the fact that he refused to answer. I wonder why that is, now?
I myself put a few easily answered questions to the SFA a few months ago, regarding Ogilvie’s election. I got an acknowledgement, but I’ve not had any answers, and I don’t expect that I’ll ever get any.
Let’s all instead just chant in unison “innocent until proven guilty”. That will make it all right- won’t it?
Simply the best…
GERS boss Ally McCoist has revealed he has relished a summer which has notably been devoid of the type of off-field dramas that have plagued the club and the beleaguered manager in his three years in charge.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-gaffer-ally-mccoist-first-3916043
How can the likes of Craig Swan be allowed to put this BS together… Devoid of off field drama !!!!
JimBhoy says:
July 26, 2014 at 2:49 pm
I think what Ally means is that they haven’t made a drama out of a crisis – as the ad used to say 🙄
I think, if I was Ally, I’d prefer a drama to a crisis, as a drama is generally an exaggeration of events, while a crisis is, well, a crisis, and due to the lack of any PR from Ibrox suggesting a dramatic turnaround in fortunes, I’d say we are justified in saying the crisis is critical!
Tincks says:
July 26, 2014 at 1:35 pm
” A criticism of someone’s post, that face to face could be softened by body language, facial gesture or followed by a kind word is instead, just a criticism sitting on a screen in black and white when put in writing.”
———————————————
The relative anonymity afforded by the blog format has its advantages and disadvantages and you have identified the latter succinctly.
TSFM from its inception in the autumn of 2012 had the aim of building on the momentum engrossed by RTC and taking it forward to the benefit of the wider football community. So though the specialist subject of the ‘shenanigans’ is still justifiably the mainstay of discussion, discourses have went beyond these narrow confines in pursuit of the blog’s wider objectives. However, whether it be the heritage of the community that are greatest adherents to this forum or whether it is just a symptom of the human condition, it has proven difficult to arrive at unequivocal truths. This should not be a surprise. We are all subject to inherent bias and this might be divined in two obvious ways.
1. We profess our instinctual opinions which provoke responses and thereby through a process of to and fro, agreement is reached or a lack of agreement recognised.
2. We couch our commentary in guarded terms being aware that we do not wish to provoke the ire of the community.
Both of these approaches have been witnessed in abundance and each can claim its successes. Indeed the lack of wider media scrutiny has led to speculation that is necessarily provocative since we do not have the individual resources to chase down the facts. Best estimates are arrived at and speculation is firmed up into sometimes quite well educated guesses. This analysis may well be very approximate to the truth but as no-one in authority can be openly quizzed about our conclusions except by a circuitous route then it is logical that our stabs in the dark might range far and wide.
Whilst there is a need to be respectful of others points of view the adversarial approach we have adopted and which is used widely in inquisitive settings has much merit. There has been discomfort and upset throughout the term but generally some accommodation is reached which will at least maintain some modicum of decorum.
Eliminating natural bias is hugely difficult however. If the conversation were to become so sterile that nothing of value was contributed for fear of it being provocative then we would have missed the point. We don’t want to offend each other but we neither wish to spend our time backslapping.
So the blog aims to be mainstream and to do this it must attempt to shed its inherent bias. It has not entirely succeeded in this but it has made some good progress. I remember a while back that I think it was Ryan Gosling, a Rangers supporter, that commented concerning the lack of contributions concerning Neil Lennon’s departure. I thought this showed a lot of maturity and in some ways maybe even over restraint since the departure of any top flight manager is worthy of scrutiny.
Contributors won’t always pitch it right. They might be a bit too provocative in the eyes of some or simply misunderstood, as Tincks highlights. In a world where there is no right or wrong we are all going to be wrong sometimes. Even the Mods. However the blog has displayed characteristics that suggest it is capable of negotiating these hazards and that indeed such negotiations is what it was designed for.
Hmm ,pitty Ally didnt feel like a football manager 3 years ago ,the club he managed then would still be alive if he had ,well managed them.
@yourhavingalaugh In those 3 years he has taken well over £2.5m out of the rangers..Result..!
@AllyJambo i suppose the use of ‘SUMMER’ in Scottish terms is dubious. It could range from a weekend to a month I suppose… Regardless there is never a day that’s short of a rangers story or a new angle to explore that only the rangers haters will..
Wee note to AMcC, preseason is about your full squad and getting fringe players fit and not results against college teams… See St Pauli v Celtic… £800k a season to give his old boys a holiday, anyone see the karaoke videos?..!!!
From the Guardian Scottish footie guy on twitter, Ewen Murray
Ally McCoist tells us this morning he “feels like a football manager” at last. Maybe people will finally start judging him as one.
It seems the Rugby 7s have thrown up a case of a major rule break : player yellow-carded with 1 min 50 secs to final whistle and sin-binned for 2 mins , came on to the pitch again before the final whistle! Peter Wright et al seething with rage because no action taken either by the match official or by the Scottish Team managers, no official complaint. Presumably because, like LNS, they think that having an ‘ineligible’ player on the pitch gives no sporting advantage!!
(And if the font size of this post is tiny, it’s no fault of mine).
Allyjambo says:
July 26, 2014 at 1:53 pm
25 0 Rate This
In the eyes of the law …
——–
Great post, among many fine posts this evening.
Also a very good point made about the distinction between the individual moron fan posting abuse and a person of public standing making irresponsible ‘who-are-these-people’ comments — and which of the two are worthy of blog discussion.
Hope twopanda hasn’t resigned 😯
JimBhoy says:
July 26, 2014 at 4:37 pm
7 4 Rate This
Wee note to AMcC, preseason is about your full squad and getting fringe players fit and not results against college teams… See St Pauli v Celtic…
——–
OT
The above notwithstanding, Mrs Pastry, who is not the most football-obsessed person I know, thought the final (male) streaker was the highlight of the match (‘He was very well built.’). Four visible Saltires, bagpipes ootside, and Dylan McGeouch did it for me 😀
At the risk of the wrath of the mob and possibly off topic Ibrox today has been a great venue for the rugby 7s. To keep it on topic now that the quality of the mushy peas at The Horseshoe has been resolved does anyone know how much the club that plays out of Ibrox will get for the gig and what Celtic will get for the opening ceremony? Must get back to the rugby 7s.
Tincks says:
July 26, 2014 at 1:35 pm
In terms of the LNS misdirection I thought it might be useful to set out why the Discount Option Scheme (DOS ebts) in relation to the payments to De Boer and Flo were illegal/unlawful, why there was no bill for the tax Moore owed, and as a consequence of all three ebt arrangements why they should not and cannot be allowed to continue to be treated as if they were legal by the Lord Nimmo Smith Commission along with the connection to Resolution 12 to the Celtic AGM.
In October 2010 an FTT ruled that payments made to their staff by Aberdeen Asset Management via a Discount Option Scheme were taxable for reasons set out in an understandable form at
http://www.pinsentmasons.com/PDF/PM-Tax/PM-Tax_Issue34.pdf
at page 17 where the opening paras explain how the DOS ebt scheme worked (Note for the avoidance of doubt it was an EBT scheme).
This from end page 17 into 18 about sums it up.
“It was also observed that being the sole owner of the entire share capital of a company (as Moore, De Boer and Flo were) which had a sole asset consisting of cash was not dissimilar to having funds in a bank account and needing to write a cheque or take other relevant action to extract the money from that bank account.”
(This was in effect the difference with the later MGMRT ebts of BTC fame where tax was legally avoided (until or unless HMRC go to a Court of Sessions) because payments there were accepted as being in the nature of a loan with restrictions on access not applicable for DOS ebts and side letters were in effect irrelevant )
Aberdeen Asset Management did not use side letters, they simply used a scheme that was blocked as illegal, although the side letters had an important role to play in the case of Rangers as will be explained.
AAM appealed to a UTT in 2012 and the UTT decision narrowed the scope of the FTT decision, but the UTT ruling was itself overturned finally at the Court of Sessions in October 2013 to restore that of the FTT of October 2010 on which HMRC first acted to pursue payment.
So we have a very definite illegal/unlawful ebt being used by Rangers from 1999 to season 2002/03 to pay Moore, Flo and De Boer. A method of payment not open to any other club which conferred an unfair wage advantage they had not means of matching.
It was the finding of the AAM FTT in October 2010 that prompted HMRC to first pursue Rangers solely on the basis that the ebts used by AAM AND so Rangers were illegal, but in February 2011 HMRC took a more detailed stance for reasons that can be deduced from the correspondence of that date.
I am unsure what the time limits are for recovering unpaid tax, there will be a norm after which unpaid tax cannot be claimed, but there are rules for extending the limits beyond the norm.
Two reasons for extending limits are if HMRC can prove negligence or fraudulent intent. (as is set out in the correspondence of Feb 2011) .
Thus HMRC sought payment of tax owed for De Boer and Flo because they had evidence that Rangers had concealed the existence of side letters from HMRC when HMRC specifically enquired in 2005 if any such letters existed. It appears HMRC also thought this evidence was withheld from visiting inspectors but there are no details of when. It was the concealment of these side letters which was the main deciding factor for Thornhill QC when advising Rangers to settle. Ironically it is the concealment of the same letters and HMRC correspondence that led to the LNS Commission being misdirected.
Significantly there was no evidence of a side letter to Craig Moore, so that the £219K that he would have owed, had it not gone outside the time limit was not pursued, although the £2.8M tax owed for De Boer and Flo (plus a £1.3M penalty) most definitely was with unfortunate consequence for an SFA and SPFL who seem determined to diminish the full extent and consequences of the breach of rules that actually took place.
What are the unfortunate consequences?
For the SP(F)L that their Commission into investigating ebts and side letters was misled and it has produced a Decision that is clearly flawed as a result and must be revisited in light of the foregoing.
For the SFA President that he made no distinction in his testimony to Lord Nimmo Smith in that Commission in spite of the fact he authorised the first DOS ebt to Craig Moore and was a recipient of a later MGMRT ebt himself .
For the SFA Licensing Committee (LC) in 2011 on which Andrew Dickson , a long term administrator at Rangers going back to when ebts were introduced, who it is reported sat on three LC meetings that year, having to deal with the granting and monitoring of a UEFA licence with unpaid social tax at either 31st March, 30th June or 30th September 2011.
For the SFA President (again) who was elected to office on 7th June 2011 just 12 or 13 days before the wee tax bill became overdue and 23 days before overdue payables had to be declared to UEFA under Article 66 of UEFA FFP 2010.
However the greatest unfortunate consequence of all of the above is to remove any semblance of honesty and trust in those running Scottish football who are still in post and one can only imagine that clubs either do not care or are unaware of what has taken place and of the potential consequent long term lingering damage it will do to our game if the duplicity at play both from 1999 to 2002/03, in 2005, in 2011 and later in 2012, when the LNS Commission was set up (and it was a set up), is not recognised and who and what caused such duplicity are brought to account and changes made to processes to stop any possibility of a repeat.
Auldheid says:
July 26, 2014 at 9:54 pm
THANKS,
I have been waiting for a post like that
• DANISH PASTRY says:
July 26, 2014 at 9:24 am
Looking forward to seeing the Scottish Champions
——————————————————
Hey Danish,
I saw two items at the game today where you immediately came to mind. The first was many empty TUBORG beer cans lying about outside the entrances, since you were with the family I am going to assume that was down to some other lager lout…..
The 2nd was some guy who sat down a few rows in front of us within The G6 section of the ground. He had a massive Danish flag tacked to a length of wood that he waved about for a short time.
Oh, that was not The Scottish Champions we saw today, looked more like their wee cousins, most expensive youth game I have ever been too 😛
Someone had a good idea about Tunnocks as sponsor. I’m not sure, but how hard can it be to find a sponsor? Are they trying hard enough? I would ask.
Those of us who like to check for a Rangers bias in all things Scottish football might also wonder – would it not be detrimental to the Ibrox club if top flight clubs earn extra money with the benefit of a sponsor whilst they work there way up? The last deal worked out at £2m a year.
On the surface, clubs don’t seem that bothered, even with an extra 28K to shell out to Neil Doncaster.
Who will the first sponsor be. Will it be Clydesdale again ready to invest with a new Rangers in the top flight? Has the deal already been done and the SPFL just can’t find anyone to fill in the gap? ❓
Two three three two says:
July 26, 2014 at 11:21 pm
Who will the first sponsor be. Will it be Clydesdale again ready to invest with a new Rangers in the top flight? Has the deal already been done and the SPFL just can’t find anyone to fill in the gap?
=============================
In such an event there will be much gloating in terms of Rangers being the only reason for sponsorship being attained. The overall media peddled notion that Scottish football needs Rangers more than Rangers needs Scottish football baffles me at best, and downright angers me at worst. Despite being told otherwise no club has gone to the wall since 2012. Two have successfully exited Administration, avoiding liquidation. Both of those clubs problems were in no way linked to the absence of Rangers.
I spoke to someone recently who was present when Donald Trump first entered the Turnberry Hotel after the purchase of the hotel and gold courses was complete. He swept in with an entourage on his tail and headed straight up the stairs without so much as a cursory glance. Trump is a successful businessman whereas Rangers are simply a failed business, but I can’t get the image out my head that when they enter the top league they will do so with a Trump style arrogance. The entourage on their tail will of course be led by Regan and Doncaster, with the likes of Keith Jackson and Chick Young tripping over each other in hot pursuit.
It’s really all quite sickening.
Madbhoy24941 says:
July 26, 2014 at 10:28 pm
7 1 Rate This
———-
I had nothing to do with either of those 😆 Mrs Pastry noticed the Danish flag down that end. Very mixed crowd. Nice when you see both sets of supporters next to each other all over the stadium. Yes, little brothers indeed, but you won’t hear me criticizing teams that field youth players!
The number of visible Saltires warmed my heart. More of that.
Don’t know what fans paid from home but I noticed the standing areas were priced at 9 Euro which seems a pretty decent price for a match of this type — that included a full-monty streaker, a man in a kilt (semi-streaker) running on, the odd flare and ‘karrywurst’ available as a snack!!
Ok, no more OT from me 😳
Just noticed that the people behind the Pertrofac Cup seem to have arranged their own dedicated site and not just a linked page under the tiresome SPFL online-ad-plagued site. At first glance, more classy. Didn’t really check the Ramsdens Cup site so no idea if they did the same. Nice though, cleaner and more professional layout.
http://petrofactrainingcup.com
upthehoops says:
July 27, 2014 at 7:23 am
———-
Two three three two says:
July 26, 2014 at 11:21 pm
Who will the first sponsor be. Will it be Clydesdale again ready to invest with a new Rangers in the top flight? Has the deal already been done and the SPFL just can’t find anyone to fill in the gap?
=============================
In such an event there will be much gloating in terms of Rangers being the only reason for sponsorship being attained.
———————————————
Very much agree (though I’d like them to prove me wrong by getting some decent sponsorship in soon). In an earlier post I suggested there may be a deliberate lack of effort to make sure what you suggest actually happens.
Spotted this –
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/scotland/28492169
Wish more of them would try and boost our game instead of running it down (because a certain team is missing).
We might be a little bit unkind to the SPL regards the lack of sponsorship ,as a matter of interest I went onto the Glasgow site for the games and clicked on to the sponsors link ,an amazing aray of financial backers,one of the first being a company called Harper/Mcloud from Glasgow ,anyone heard of them before,so lets just say that the games employed the top go getters to source the sponsorship unlike the custodians of our football,I would imagine our football people will be chasing up these sponsors as the games will be over shortly and they must have some spare cash they would want to sponsor another sport,maybe a top football league ,only a suggestion.
So, All McCostly feels like a manager at last. Right then,no dog whistling,no deflection,no blaming others,no snide side swipes.No Excuses. Stand or fall.Earn your corn for a change.Get on with it.
Regarding my earlier comments about SPFL sponsorship.
I say:
July 26, 2014 at 11:21 pm
After a year without a sponsor I would expect to hear more either from the SPFL themselves or clubs whining and asking questions. I might expect even say, a big banner advert on the SPFL website saying Sponsor required and talking up the benefits of such a deal. There has been no statements or updates released regarding progress being made or the difficulties encountered or any mollification. I’ve only heard Neil D say “we will continue to look for a sponsor” in response to some Journo.
Recently sponsorship has been announced with Petrofac, Programme master, Irn Bru and MP and Silva. At the bottom of each page of the SPFL website logos of 15 sponsors/partners are displayed.
Football Clubs are generally owned by business men. With all those connections out there a main sponsor can’t be found since the knowledge (Nov 2011) that the last deal would not be renewed?
Has anyone heard anything of a sponsor being approached, maybe there’s sponsors out there who have been rebuffed?
I would like to ask: How many companies have been approached in this time? Could you make this information available to a group who could allay our suspicions? What is the over arching reason that these companies have declined?
Auldheid says:
July 26, 2014 at 9:54 pm
A typically first-class, concise summary of events, Auldheid. Your tenacity in pursuing justice (or at least an acknowledgement of wrongdoing) is inspiring, and invariably reinvigorates my own flagging enthusiasm whenever I have a “What’s the point?” moment – usually after having read a link to a “feel-good” story from the chip wrappers.
Thank you.
Thanks, also, to Kilgore Trout for the instructions on how to reinstate my old username, and to John Clark for encouraging me to do so. I love this blog.
A link, whilst not about football, is, I think, relevant to football.
https://twitter.com/thejournal_ie/status/493331216720883714
I see Mr McCoist has declared that all is well down Ibrox way with the new Club. All the woes of the previous 2 years have dissapeared and he feels like a football manager now. Great. Congratulations…What was the seismic event that caused this great swing.Has there been another statement that I have missed? Whats new? Anyone?
Slightly off topic but relevant in my opinion. One of the Rangers fans spokespersons who is regularly indulged by several media outlets has chosen to use his twitter account to indulge in childish and crass jibes about the Commonwealth games. Needless to say he manages to turn many aspects of it into a pro-Rangers / anti-Celtic affair. Aside from the Commonwealth games being as far from that type of debate as possible, why do the media continue to indulge such a person? It’s just not right and sends out the completely wrong message.
upthehoops says:
July 27, 2014 at 3:09 pm
8 0 Rate This
Slightly off topic but relevant in my opinion. One of the Rangers fans spokespersons who is regularly indulged by several media outlets has chosen to use his twitter account to indulge in childish and crass jibes about the Commonwealth games. Needless to say he manages to turn many aspects of it into a pro-Rangers / anti-Celtic affair. Aside from the Commonwealth games being as far from that type of debate as possible, why do the media continue to indulge such a person? It’s just not right and sends out the completely wrong message.
=====================
Couldn’t agree more UTH. I really peeves me when I see this particular individual invited to bring his particular brand of small mindedness to our TV. And of course completely unchallenged by our Broadcasters and Journalists.
I think the only thing the media outlets react to is a flurry of complaints but it takes something quite dramatic for most ordinary folks to formalise such a complaint.
(Unlike some of other groups who need to only imagine some bizzarre slight before they are flooding whatever media outlet with complaints or threats.)
Matty Roth says:
July 27, 2014 at 3:47 pm
===========================
I stopped buying the Scotland on Sunday newspaper because of this person. He was given a column three weeks in succession which in my view was completely inappropriate given the content of what he was writing. I wrote to the Sports Editor and requested that a blogger of the opposite view be given the right to reply but it never happened. I then simply stopped buying a paper I had read and generally enjoyed for two decades, but I was unwilling to pay money to have his completely subjective views and mentions of unfounded rumours forced upon me.
upthehoops says:
July 27, 2014 at 4:23 pm
7 3 Rate This
Matty Roth says:
July 27, 2014 at 3:47 pm
===========================
I stopped buying the Scotland on Sunday newspaper because of this person. He was given a column three weeks in succession which in my view was completely inappropriate given the content of what he was writing. I wrote to the Sports Editor and requested that a blogger of the opposite view be given the right to reply but it never happened. I then simply stopped buying a paper I had read and generally enjoyed for two decades, but I was unwilling to pay money to have his completely subjective views and mentions of unfounded rumours forced upon me.
=============
I don’t buy any Scottish Newspapers anymore and only occasionally read their content online.
As you say there are too many slanted opinions and simply not enough facts, just not worth paying for.
Matty Roth says:
July 27, 2014 at 6:12 pm
I don’t buy any Scottish Newspapers anymore and only occasionally read their content online.
============================================
Their tendency to repeat PR puff pieces without challenge is the most frustrating of all for me. Yet look at the well researched and factually based information available on a blog such as this. There are many gems on here they could go after having had the hard work done for them but they are just not interested. The post we are writing under by BRTH gives a detailed explanation from a qualified legal mind of the risks David Murray put Rangers under by having an EBT scheme. Crucially, it states HMRC will go after any organisation who operates them and that clients are told this. Yet the media are happy to peddle the notion HMRC simply indulged in an anti-Rangers witch hunt, which to any fair minded person is a preposterous notion. I have to conclude the ‘cultural’ influence of the club from Ibrox is the one and only reason why we are where we are.
ThomTheThim says:
July 27, 2014 at 2:10 pm
“A link, whilst not about football, is, I think, relevant to football.”
—————————–
I think it provides a highly pertinent parallel concerning how we have grown to view our own media. Kelly apparently produced articles on doping in cycling long before the topic ever became live. He appears to have almost single handedly shamed the sport of cycling into addressing its problems. I think Kelly found that he was being ostracised by his journalistic community and only belatedly received recognition for his campaigning efforts. This tweet suggests that he has not been rewarded with hero status by the journalistic fraternity which may logically close ranks to conceal their own complicitness.
It reminds me of a tenet of Italian politician Machiavelli, that upon a Prince’s conquest he needs necessarily distance his allies and encompass his erstwhile enemies. The vanquished are far more compliant whereas the victorious might crave power. In a similar manner the whistleblower is scapegoated for fear that his ethics might infect the body politic. Since the whistleblower executes his strategy in the cause of justice, then the lack of temporal reward might be seen as logical. Posterity will be the judge of this rather than cold reality that would fracture in the attempt to encompass its own shortcomings.
Similarly with attempts to expose injustices closer to home, it is probably naive to expect victory. For then judgement would not lie with the entitled but with the proletariat. The last thing the establishment wants is the plebs calling the shots since that might lead to some kind of democracy which of course would be an unfortunate outcome for them. Rather that their work be plagiarised and used to curb the worst excesses of the expedient, in which manner authority can be maintained in ‘its rightful place’.
Kelly was working in an environment where hypocrisy was rife and where the difference between pharmacology and nutrition had become exceedingly slim. This is true for many sports still.
Similarly the tension between commercial reality and sporting integrity means that those enmeshed in the miasma of their respective sports will find it difficult to make the fine distinctions necessary to nourish their endeavours.
When Machiavelli humbly presented his treatise on statesmanship to Francesco Sforza, Duke of Milan, he ingratiated and excused himself by recognising this necessary distancing of the observer from his subject. To paraphrase, he illustrated his suitability to arrive at his conclusions by pointing out that though the Prince can easier survey his realm from atop his lofty dignity, he (Machiavelli) could better recognise the form of this dignity from his lowly aspect on the valley floor.
Although we all crave that moment of victory it is as rewarding to sit in the stalls and mock the players as they parade across the stage attempting to play out their charade. We are in denial if we cannot admit the levels of hypocrisy displayed have been absurdly entertaining, however frustrating.
Unusual to issue a Board statement on a Sunday
http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/7322-board-statement
THE Board of Rangers Football Club (‘the Club’) has been asked in the past several weeks to confirm once again that the Club will not grant security over Ibrox to any organisation during the upcoming football season.
The Board is happy to reaffirm its position, which has never been a matter of debate, by confirming once again that it will not enter into any form of sale, securitisation or leaseback of Ibrox Stadium. This has been and still remains the Board’s clear and consistent position on this subject as it continues to protect and enhance the assets of the Club.
The Board of Rangers Football Club is committed to protecting the assets of the Club for the benefit of all Rangers fans, and to adhering to the highest standards of corporate governance.
Season Ticket sales are continuing throughout the next few weeks ahead of the start of the season and we are grateful to the thousands of supporters who have already bought for the 2014/15 campaign. Events over the past few weeks have reminded everybody of the remarkably testing period our incredible supporters have been through in recent years and now is the time for us all to look forwards, together.
—————
No mention of Auchenhowie (Murray Park) though.
Could be a forerunner to some announcement next week.
ThomTheThim says:
July 27, 2014 at 2:10 pm
4 0 Rate This
A link, whilst not about football, is, I think, relevant to football.
https://twitter.com/thejournal_ie/status/493331216720883714
————-
Very relevant.
Christophe Bassons is another former rider who has been in the news during this Tour. He paid a heavy personal price for his anti-cheating stance but has been vindicated by subsequent events. True sportsman, imo.
Well done to all the Tour riders today, at least their samples can be tested in years to come. Good example for all sports seeking a level playing field. Football is far behind.
upthehoops says:
July 27, 2014 at 3:09 pm
37 4 Rate This
why do the media continue to indulge such a person? It’s just not right and sends out the completely wrong message.
==============================================
They dont care about “right”, they are sending the message to their target and core market. They obviously dont care about the truth or anyone outside this demographic. You are not alone in not having bought or read a newspaper in years, and that is the reason.
Rangers International Football Club plc
Philip Nash has been appointed to the Board of Rangers (“Board”) with immediate effect.
Mr Nash is currently beneficially interested in 0.27 per cent of the issued share capital of the Company.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
That’s interesting
O.27% of the issued share capital of RIFC =175760 shares This is worth around £50k at the sp on the 25 July date of the announcement
Does this mean
Mr Nash is committed to buy 175760 shares in RIFC as part of deal which lead to his appointment to the RIFC Board ?
Nope
Or does it mean
Mr Nash bought 175760 shares in RIFC before or after he took up his consultancy job at Ibrox?
Nope
So what does the phrase “beneficially interested” mean?
Actually
A “beneficial interest” is any “interest of value, worth, or use in property one does not own,”
Or put another way
Mr Nash is NOT a shareholder in RIFC but has an “interest” in becoming a shareholder in RIFC
In Spiv language this means
Mr Nash has done a deal to get the option to acquire 175760 shares in RIFC at a price that is a secret between him and the Board of RIFC
Which raises the question
Are RIFC so skint that they have reneged on paying Mr Nash some of his fee for the Spiv work he has done so far?
And
Have agreed to pay him the equivalent of around £50k in freebie shares ?
Providing he hands over voting rights for these shares to the Spivs?
Or
Is it simply another way of milking the cow that is TRFC?
Time will tell
A very long time from now
GoosyGoosy says: July 27, 2014 at 9:29 pm
0.27% of the issued share capital of RIFC =175760 shares This is worth around £50k at the sp on the 25 July date of the announcement
———–
The shares on issue increased by 714K when Brian Stockpile took up his option, so the 0.27% equates to 177,688 shares.
GoosyGoosy says:
July 27, 2014 at 9:29 pm
2 0 Rate This
Brilliant Goosy! Two years ago I (and probably a few others on here) would have assumed that Mr Nash had bought a load of shares to get a seat on the board.
Not any more, how this place has opened my eyes.
easyJambo says:
July 27, 2014 at 7:45 pm
‘…Unusual to issue a Board statement on a Sunday.’
————
EJ,it does seem a bit odd to be issuing any kind of business statement at 7.00 pm on a Sunday.What’s the hell-fire hurry?
Is PMG ( or some other source) about to release a new nugget of information that might alarm the lieges?( Perhaps, as you speculate, the sale of Auchenhowie?)
And the wording of the first para:”… that the Club will not grant security over Ibrox to any organisation during the upcoming football season.” I’m not a naturally suspicious type, but reference to a particular limited time-frame might suggest that, should the ‘upcoming football season’ see the ‘club’ NOT winning the Championship, the Board has wriggle room to change its position?
And,in any case, aren’t the RIFC Board the ones who can call all the shots- the TRFC board being mere ciphers, any one of them as easily voted out as kiss my armadillo?
The Daily Record mentioned the, ‘L’ word and how a certain club reformed from it. They must be slipping. I also think some Hacks might be reading this blog for hints and answers.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-board-responds-sons-struth-3923402
OT. Well done to the Rovers, these games always seem to be packed with goals and excitement. Well done to Airdrie for playing there part. 😀
Also well done to the Rennicks sisters for winning golds in Judo.
It’s not just Iron Men that come from the Iron Burgh.
ThomTheThim says:
July 27, 2014 at 2:10 pm
‘.A link, whilst not about football, is, I think, relevant to football.’
_________
Anything to do with journalistic exposure of jiggery-pokery in sport is very, very relevant to football, and particularly relevant on this blog.
Sadly, we do not appear to have guys like Paul Kimmage either in BBC Radio Scotland, or on any of our ‘serious’ newspapers.
Perhaps there are such, but they have been warned to lay off, and have heeded the warnings.I have a degree of sympathy for these.
But for those who act as cheerleaders for wrong-doers and propagandists for spivs of one kind or another, I have only a cold contempt
The others who
It’s taken a while but now I get it. While you cannot reform something that has been liquidated, you can reform it after a liquidation crisis!
I shouldn’t laugh. The Record has taken another little tip-toe towards the truth by even mentioning the word that could never be mentioned. The utterly execrable Richard Wilson is still referring to it as a “financial crisis”.
easyJambo says:
July 27, 2014 at 7:45 pm
THE Board of Rangers Football Club (‘the Club’) has been asked in the past several weeks to confirm once again that the Club will not grant security over Ibrox to any organisation during the upcoming football season.
The Board is happy to reaffirm its position, which has never been a matter of debate, by confirming once again that it will not enter into any form of sale, securitisation or leaseback of Ibrox Stadium.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Why were these two comments linked ?
Three reasons
——It pretends to be a considered response to the SOS march on Ibrox..despite it being a reiteration of the previous statement
——It excludes MP……….. as some shrewd posters have already spotted
And
……….It puts a limit on the length of time for which the Ibrox commitment is given
i.e.
Far from being a commitment to never sell or sell and leaseback Ibrox and MP
It is a commitment simply to refrain from selling or selling and leasing Ibrox until the end of next season
And makes no commitment whatsoever on disposing of MP
This commitment could be honoured by selling MP in Aug 2014
And
Selling Ibrox in May 2015
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
This scenario would appeal to those who believe whataboutery is rife in George Square
Like the idea of
GDC privately agreeing to nod through building consent for MP as a quid pro quo for the squillions invested in the East End ?
my post of 11.03 pm: not sure where ‘the others who’…came from.Must have had a senior moment while editing. I do apologise, (and I would love to know what it was I was going to say!) 🙂
My immediate thinking on the Nash appointment as Director was that it might be a cheaper option for TRFC to get him off his probably eye-watering day rate as a consultant. But he was already Company Secretary so don’t know if he was already on the TRFC payroll.
But shirley, as someone with an apparently decent track record at Arsenal and Liverpool it would have been in Nash’s interest to remain at arm’s length as a consultant – and he is only 43 IIRC.
Now he is a Director he has collective responsibility if things go awry.
Or he is indeed now a fully-fledged spiv ?
Agreed, the same statement implied that his appointment was not to be ‘long-term’ – which may or may not turn out to be the case. But why even mention duration ? If you had a crisis and needed to maybe bring in an e.g. ‘veteran’, interim CEO or Director whilst you looked for a permanent replacement then fine. But to mention duration of appointment wrt Nash just creates more uncertainty and/or just raises more questions. Or maybe the statement was to get a message out to relevant parties ? Don’t know.
But like many things related to TRFC this is just another scenario which I struggle to get my wee head around…
StevieBC says:
July 28, 2014 at 2:25 am
But like many things related to TRFC this is just another scenario which I struggle to get my wee head around…
==========================================
What I can’t get my head around is how they carry on as normal despite basic arithmetic telling us they must be cash strapped in terms of being able to see out the season. If Phil McG’s source is correct they are unable to access the season ticket cash for next season, and they will not have a credit line with a bank. Yet they continue to sign players and go on tour to North America. It’s baffling but I should have long realised normal rules don’t apply to clubs who play out of Ibrox.
Craig Swan in the DR:
Good to see Michael Grant in the Herald has taken up the UEFA coefficient issue. Now all we need is Regan & Ogilvie to actually do something to help our clubs
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/european-football-keeping-the-rich-rich-and-scotland-poor.24869248?
upthehoops says:
July 28, 2014 at 7:12 am
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
A cheeky thought came to me last night. Could it be that RIFC / TRFC have been told, in no uncertain terms, possibly against RCO’s wishes, that further insolvency issues will be an embarrassment too far? That should it happen then they can expect disrepute charges, punitive measures, dare I say it… expulsion?! It may seem far-fetched but there must come a time when the embarrassment levels can no longer be tolerated?
I realise that all of the evidence of inaction so far points to this not happening but surely Regan and Doncaster, at least, are able to stand back slightly and be in a position to say “Kin something Campbell, this has gone too far…”
Further to this, could it be at all possible that the SFA are lending a financial hand to keep the doors un-padlocked?
These are all just ideas that are floating around in my head and in no way should be taken as being grounded in any kind of reality. But then, according to the number crunchers nothing down Govan way is grounded in reality. 😳
GoosyGoosy says:
July 28, 2014 at 12:31 am
Like the idea of
GDC privately agreeing to nod through building consent for MP as a quid pro quo for the squillions invested in the East End ?
===========================
MP comes under the jurisdiction of East Dunbartonshire Council 😉
On the subject of player registrations, is there perhaps a dichotomy concerning the stance taken by LNS in his tribunal judgement as against its corollary.
LNS indicated that as EBT’s had not been shown to be in contravention of tax legislation then they might have been registered as part of the players contract without prejudice.
Extract from LNS decision section 105 :
“that such arrangements, resulting in loans made to the players, did not give rise to payments absolutely or unreservedly held for or to the order of the individual players. On that basis, the EBT arrangements could have been disclosed as contractual arrangements giving rise to a facility for the player to receive loans, and there would have been no breach of the disclosure rules.”
However this assertion by LNS seems to be spurious and forwarded largely in his support of the judgement on Rangers conduct being no more than administrative error. Had we the benefit of parallel universes then we could test this assertion. In the absence of such a scarce faculty then we might legitimately ask the question, what would have happened if Rangers had registered the EBT’s as part of the players contracts?
The FTT and UTT both made reference to side letters as HMRC attempted to prove contractual liability. If HMRC had the facility of player registrations with EBT payments included, would this have further strengthened their case that these payments were not in fact discretionary but contractual? If the sport’s governing bodies rules required that all details of a players contract need be registered with them and these registrations were to include EBT payments, might that not strengthen HMRC’s case? Might it strengthen the case to the point of success?
In LNS parallel universe all things appear to be unrelated and stand by themselves in isolation. In a universe where relativity is ubiquitous, such selective treatment of facts will not suffice.
LNS seems to have been touting at paradoxes and failed to conclude his own logical train of thought.
causaludendi says:
July 28, 2014 at 9:31 am
‘..Further to this, could it be at all possible that the SFA are lending a financial hand to keep the doors un-padlocked?’
——–
Not only could it be possible,but ,such has been the behaviour of the SFA Board ( which seems not to be terribly well scrutinised or held to account by the general membership but able to do its own thing), that very few of us would be surprised were it actually to be the case!
The collapse into liquidation of RIFC plc would require the en bloc reignation or sacking of the entire Board. They have already been guilty of one horrendous act of sporting betrayal in striking a rotten deal with CG. They would not baulk at another, if they thought they could get away with it.
Just discovered a hitch with the mailing service. It is now sorted, but if anyone has any problems, please send a message to postmaster@tsfm.net
Apologies for any inconvenience.
Phil’s got some comments on a few things this afternoon!