UEFA Club Licensing. – To Comply or not to Comply ?
On 16 April 2018 The UEFA Club Financial Control Body (CFCB) adjudicatory chamber took decisions in the cases of four clubs that had been referred to it by the CFCB chief investigator, concerning the non-fulfilment of the club licensing criteria defined in the UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations.
Such criteria must be complied with by the clubs in order to be granted the licence required to enter the UEFA club competitions.
The cases of two clubs::
Olympique des Alpes SA (Sion Switzerland )
and
FC Irtysh (Kazakhstan)
are of particular interest to those following the events under which the SFA awarded a UEFA License to Rangers FC in 2011 currently under investigation by the SFA Compliance Officer because
- The case documentation tell us how UEFA wish national associations to apply UEFA FFP rules
- The cases tell us what might have happened to Rangers FC in 2012 had they not gone into liquidation and as a consequence avoided the same type of sanctions that UEFA applied to Sion and Irtysh.
FC Sion (Olympique des Alpes SA)
Here we are told how the Swiss FL and then the UEFA CFCB acted in respect of FC Sion in 2017 where a misleading statement was made in the Sion UEFA licensing application.
Full details can be read at
but this is a summary.
In April 2017 the Swiss FL (SFL) granted a licence to Sion FC but indicated that a Disciplinary case was pending.
In July 2017 the CFCB, as part of their licence auditing programme, carried out a compliance audit on 3 clubs to determine if licences had been properly awarded. Sion was one of those clubs.
The subsequent audit by Deloitte LLP discovered Sion had an overdue payable on a player, amounting to €950,000, owed to another football club (FC Sochaux ) at 31st March 2017 as a result of a transfer undertaken by Sion before 31st December 2016, although the €950,000 was paid in early June 2017.
Deloitte produced a draft report of their findings that was passed to SFL and Sion for comment on factual accuracy and comment on the findings. Sion responded quickly enabling Deloitte to present a final report to the CFCB Investigation Unit. In response to the Deloitte final report Sion stated:
“il apparaît aujourd’hui qu’il existait bel et bien un engagement impayé découlant d’une activité de transfert. Ce point est admis” translated as
“it now appears that there was indeed an outstanding commitment arising from transfer activity. This is admitted”
What emerged as the investigation proceeded was that the Swiss FL Licensing Committee, after granting the license in April and as a result of a Sochaux complaint of non-payment to FIFA, had reason to refer Sion’s application to their Disciplinary Commission in May 2017 with regard to the submission of potentially misleading information by FC Sion to the SFL on 7th April 2017 as part of its licensing documentation.
Sion had declared
“Written confirmation: no overdue payables arising from transfer activities”, signed by the Club’s president, stating that as at 31 March 2017 there were no overdue payables towards other football clubs. In particular, the Club indicated that the case between FC Sion and FC Sochaux regarding the transfer of the player Ishmael Yartey was still under dispute.
The SFL Disciplinary Commission came to the conclusion that FC Sion had no intention to mislead the SFL, but indeed submitted some incorrect licensing documentation; the SFL Disciplinary Commission further confirmed that the total amount of €950,000 had been paid by the Club to FC Sochaux on 7 June 2017. Because of the inaccurate information submitted, the SFL Disciplinary Commission decided to impose a fine of CHF 8,000 on the Club.
Whilst this satisfied the SFL Disciplinary process the CFCB deemed it not enough to justify the granting of the licence as UEFA intended their FFP rules to be applied.
Sion provided the CFCB with a number of reasons on the basis of which no sanction should be imposed. In particular, the Club admitted that there was an overdue payable as at 31 March 2017, but stated that the mistake in the document dated 7 April 2017 was the result of a misinterpretation by the club’s responsible person for dealing with the licence (the “Club’s licence manager”), who is not a lawyer. The Club affirmed that it never had the intention to conceal the information and had provisioned the amount due for payment and that, in any case, it has already been sanctioned by the SFL for providing the wrong information.
The CFCB Investigation Unit accepted that the Sion application, although inaccurate, was a one off misrepresentation and not a forgery, (as in intended to deceive ) but that nevertheless an overdue payable did exist at 31st March and a licence should not have been granted.
Based on their findings, the CFCB Chief Investigator decided to refer the case to the CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber and suggested a disciplinary measure to be imposed on FC Sion by the CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber, such measure consisting of a fine of €235,000, corresponding to the UEFA Revenues the Club gained by participating in the 2017/2018 UEFA Europa League.
The CFCB Investigatory Chamber submitted that it was appropriate to impose a fine corresponding to all the UEFA revenues the Club gained by participating in the competition considering the fact that FC Sion should not have been admitted to the competition for failing to meet one of its admission criteria.
The Adjudicatory Chambers took all the circumstances (see paras 91 to 120 at http://tiny.cc/i8sxsy ) into consideration and reached the following key decisions.
- FC Sion failed to satisfy the requirements of Article 49(1) of the CL&FFP Regulations and it obtained the licence issued by the SFL not in accordance with the CL&FFP Regulations.
- FC Sion breached Articles 13(1) and 43(1)(i) of the CL&FFP Regulations. (Documents complete and correct)
- To exclude FC Sion from participating in the next UEFA club competition for which it would otherwise qualify in the next two (2) seasons (i.e. the 2018/19 and 2019/20).
- To impose a fine of two hundred and thirty five thousand Euros (€235,000) on FC Sion.
- FC Sion is to pay three thousand Euros (€3,000) towards the costs of these proceedings.
Comment in respect of the award of a UEFA Licence in 2011 to Rangers FC.
It is now public knowledge that an actual liability of tax due before 31stDecember 2010 towards HMRC, was admitted by Rangers FC before 31st March 2011.
This liability was described as “potential” in Rangers Interim accounts audited by Grant Thornton.
“Note 1: The exceptional item reflects a provision for a potential tax liability in relation to a Discounted Option Scheme associated with player contributions between 1999 and 2003. A provision for interest of £0.9m has also been included within the interest charge.”
The English Oxford Dictionary definition of potential is:
Having or showing the capacity to develop into something in the future.
Which was not true as the liability had already been “developed” so could not be potential.
This was repeated by Chairman Alistair Johnson in his covering Interim Accounts statement
“The exceptional item reflects a provision for a potential tax liability in relation to a Discounted Option Scheme associated with player contributions between 1999 and 2003. “ where he also added
“Discussions are continuing with HMRC to establish a resolution to the assessments raised.”
This could be taken as disputing the liability but In fact the resolution to the assessments raised would have been payment of the actual liability, something that never happened.
In the Sion case it was accepted the misleading statement was a one off misrepresentation, but at the monitoring stages at June 2011 in Ranger’s case the status of the liability continued to be misrepresented and in September the continuing discussions reason was repeated, along with a claim of an instalment paid whose veracity is highly questionable.
The Swiss FL Licensing Committee did at least refer the case to their Disciplinary Committee when they realised a misleading statement might have been made. The SFA however in August 2011, when Sherriff Officers called at Ibrox for payment of the overdue tax , did no such thing and pulled up the drawbridge for six years, one that the Compliance Officer is now finally charged with lowering.
The case of FC Irtysh of Kazakhstan is set out in full at http://tiny.cc/y9sxsy and is a bit more straightforward but is nevertheless useful to compare with events in 2011 in Scotland.
Unlike Rangers FC , FC Irtysh properly disclosed that they had an overdue payable to the Kazakhstan tax authorities at the monitoring point at 30th June 2017. This caused the CFCB Investigatory Unit to seek further information with regard to the position at 31st March
It transpired that Irtysh had declared an overdue payable at 31st March but cited their financial position (awaiting sponsor money) as a reason for non payment to the Kazakhstan FA who accepted it and granted the licence. The outstanding tax was paid in September 2107.
The outcome of the CFCB Investigation was a case put to the CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber who agreed with the CFCB Investigation Unit that a licence should not have been granted and recommended that Irtysh be fined the equivalent of the UEFA prize money, (that had been withheld in any case whilst CFCB investigated.)
The CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber however decided that a fine was not sufficient in sporting deterrent terms and ruled that:
- FC Irtysh failed to satisfy the requirements of Article 50bis(1) of the CL&FFP Regulations and it obtained the licence issued by the FFK not in accordance with the CL&FFP Regulations.
- To withhold four hundred and forty thousand Euros (€440,000) corresponding to the UEFA revenues FC Irtysh gained by participating in the 2017/2018 UEFA Europa League.
- To exclude FC Irtysh from participating in the next UEFA club competition for which it would otherwise qualify in the next three (3) seasons (i.e. the 2018/19, 2019/20 and 2020/21 seasons). This sanction is deferred for a probationary period of (3) three years. This exclusion must be enforced in case the Club participates again in a UEFA club competition having not fulfilled the licence criteria required to obtain the UEFA licence in accordance with the CL&FFP Regulations.
- FC Irtysh is to pay three thousand Euros (€3,000) towards the costs of these proceedings. “
The deferral was because unlike Rangers FC, FC Irtysh had properly disclosed to the licensor the correct & accurate financial information required, so the exclusion was deferred for a probationary period of (3) years.
Comment in respect of the award of a UEFA Licence in 2011 to Rangers FC.
From the foregoing it could be deduced that had Rangers FC qualified for the Champions League (or European League) and not gone bust as a result and so not entered liquidation BUT it became public knowledge by 2012 that a licence had been wrongly and possibly fraudulently granted then
- Rangers would have been fined the equivalent of their earnings from their participation in the UEFA competitions in 2011
- At least a two year ban from UEFA Competitions would have been imposed, but more likely three in view of repeated incorrect statements.
- The consequences of both would have been as damaging for Rangers survival as the real life consequences of losing to Malmo and Maribor in the qualifying rounds of the Champions and European Leagues.
Karma eh!
Interestingly in the UEFA COMPLIANCE AND INVESTIGATION ACTIVITY REPORT 2015 – 2017 , the CFCB investigatory chamber recommended that both the Kazakhstan FA and Swiss FA as licensors
“pay particular attention to the adequate disclosure of the outstanding amounts payable towards other football clubs, in respect of employees and towards social/tax authorities, which must be disclosed separately;
Would the same recommendation apply to the Scottish FA with regard to their performance in 2011 and will the SFA responses thereafter to shareholders in a member club be examined for compliance with best governance practice by the SFA Compliance Officer investigating the processing of the UEFA Licence in 2011?
This would be a welcome step in fully restoring trust in the SFA.
Says it right there sj did you miss it.
Steven Gerrard has been left humiliated by Sevco’s derisory bid for Martin Skrtel.
In a detailed interview with the Daily Record the players agent, Karol Csonto, revealed that once detailed talks got underway Sevco were only able to offer one fifth of the defender’s current salary and no transfer fee to Fenerbahce!.
Tony
Something is brewing
Deflector Shields 100%
The Rangers statement re the SFA will no doubt divide down the normal tribal lines but in my opinion any attempt to shake up the status quo at the SFA should be welcomed.
I’ve no doubt at all that their more aggressive stance is timed to discredit Maxwell who is rightly or wrongly viewed to have been Peter Lawwell’s preferred choice for the CEO role but their motivation doesn’t make their points less valid.
Forgetting Hughes’ alleged “offence” which doesn’t warrant dismissal in my opinion it does shine a light on the question of who are these “independent” non-execs, what vetting is carried out around their independence and what do they bring to the table? It certainly isn’t any knowledge or track record of sports administration. If those positions are scrutinised as a result then it’s a positive for us all.
Then we come back to Mr Maxwell, a lovely guy or “good bloke” according to anyone who mentions him in the SMSM. Sadly a lovely guy with absolutely no executive level experience within a large organisation has been thrust into one of the most high profile roles in the country running an association with 40 million quid’s worth of turnover. He’s completely out of his depth and if Rangers’ actions highlight that problem at an early stage then good on them.
SHUG 13.52
Nowhere to be seen.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-transfer-news/martin-skrtels-rangers-deal-dead-12584288
WOODSTEIN
And it’s big
HOMUNCULUSMAY 24, 2018 at 13:24
It goes back to the old pub trivia quiz questions of ‘who was the only Hibs player to have had his wages paid by the Hearts?’
The answer being George Best, because he was being paid directly by the Hart family who ran Hibs at the time.
Anyway there is nothing wrong with the directors loans in a Uefa FPP situation as long as they do not exceed a certain level.
If they do then they have to be converted to equity or (not sure if it is possible) get altered to a no conditions attached donation to the club, similar to one that Hearts received earlier this season.
The issue at Ibrox is do the current outstanding loans break the Uefa rules because they sure as hell don’t look like being written off any time soon given all the talk of debt for equity swaps (which hasn’t happened despite three yeas of the King reign passing.)
It then comes down to how different people interpret matters and/or our footballing authorities being open and transparent on why T’Rangers are deemed to be operating in the required manner.
Why it should be so complicated, I don’t know.
T’Rangers are either in hock and out of their depth or they are not. And if not, why not just explain it to us all and move on.
Wottpi
May 24, 2018 at 14:08
============================
Indeed, however it is things like this that FFP was desgned to combat. Very wealthy men skewing competition by putting money into their hobby and buying “success”.
Like I said earlier Abramovitch converted hundreds of millions in loans to equity so as not to fall foul of it, as did the owners of Manchester City. Call them soft loans if people want, at the end of the day Rangers have been able to afford players and wages they could not have without them. King has said he will do it next season as well. He even calls it a plan.
With regards said conversion, I am not convinced all of the directors will still want to do it. Take for example the “associated parties”, will Barry Scott leaving the board have any influence on that. Did they ever intend a conversion, I can’t remember.
Jimbo
the no permission to edit that post happens after the five minutes editing time is over – nothing sinister there
Someone said that you flaunted the rules here- I have never seen you do that there has been a lot of flounting however.
As to preying on folks empathy – praying is not preying and I believe the other poster overstepped the mark in what he said.
I have a feeling of the kind of guy you are from your posts and do not get the impression that you give abuse to others so should expect the same courtesy here. Having said that I could be wholy wrong about that – I often come across like a bear swallowing a wasp despite my best intentions -being cross eyed does not help (am I allowed to compare myself to a cross eyed bear swallowing a wasp? I used to be brown bear like but the beard is white now)
Sj maybe try a paper version online too easy to change to suit the narrative.
I wonder if they will scrap the skrtel song now.
The skrtel song in full.
https://twitter.com/Iain_64/status/999025986279825409/photo/1
SHUG 15.04
Apart from The Times on a Saturday i don’t buy any other newspaper.
That maybe so Slim but you appear to be buying Level 5’s Raphael Sheidt
JTF 15.22
In what way?.
SLIMJIMMAY 24, 2018 at 13:29
CORRUPT OFFICIAL 13.23Disagree to an extent co. Whilst MS is way beyond what Rangers can afford to pay i believe there are still players of a decent quality out there for a fraction of the price , both in terms of transfer fee & salary.
——————————————————————————————————
There are slim, but are markedly lower box-office, younger, inexperienced, and require a decent scouting system to source.
It was box-office showboating…Sooner or later Sevvies will waken up to the fact the board of the club they support continually, and unashamedly, lies to them….I don’t know how you feel about being given a using, but I wouldn’t be best pleased.
tony
May 24, 2018 at 14:04
paddy malarkey May 24, 2018 at 13:14
CORRUPT OFFICIALMAY 24, 2018 at 12:56
Lsd, man , Lsd .
=======================
I’d stay away from that stuff Paddy, you’re hallucinating ……. man!
As reported in the Scotsman, sourced from the Herald:
https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/rangers/dave-king-urges-sfa-to-suspend-director-over-great-unwashed-comments-1-4744346
I particularly like these comments that are attributed to DCK:
‘I can confirm receipt of information, which would appear to be credible and merits an immediate and thorough independent investigation. Mr Hughes should be suspended pending the investigation. I also believe steps must be taken to ascertain whether any other SFA individuals were aware of what Mr Hughes said about Rangers supporters before he was appointed a non-executive director of the governing body in 2015.’
It would be laughable if it wasn’t so tragic. The best bit is left to the last, though:
‘King insisted that it was “important to discover” if there had been any breach of the SFA’s duties and responsibilities to all clubs.’
Jesus wept!
DCK constantly has to dodge bullets, only to put his head above the parapet to get pot-shotted again & again with this nonsense.
Is he (or Level Sinko) really chanting ‘Come & have a go, if you think you’re hard enough!’ towards the Sixth Floor at Hampden? What’s he hoping for?
Permarage from TRFC or is it RIFC – the complaint from the fans there is that the club respond to everything with “dignified silence” the only part correct there is that there is a space between the words – if that is dignified silence I fear what an intemperate response would be.
Making friends on the journey by lashing out like a two year old- will it ever catch on? I hope not
Only quoting Dylan (Magic Roundabout) . If you see me mention a couple of j’s, I am referring to your good self and Ally .
Jingso.Jimsie
May 24, 2018 at 16:58
———————————————-
obfuscation
noun
noun: obfuscation; plural noun: obfuscations
1. the action of making something obscure, unclear, or unintelligible.
“when confronted with sharp questions they resort to obfuscation”
Origin
late Middle English: from late Latin obfuscatio(n-), from obfuscare ‘to darken or obscure’ (see obfuscate).
David Cunningham King’s forte.
Given the desire of King and T’Rangers to get to the bottom of the ‘Hughes affair’ lets hope they are not going to be hypocritical when the SFA ask them to come clean with regard to the 2012 Uefa licence application.
After all this time we would all benefit from having the clubs ‘dirty laundry’ aired in public being they have long been the talk of the Steamie.
We all know something stinks to high heaven in the way the WTC was dealt with.
Even now we know something doesn’t smell right about how the club is funded.
They really are a shower of chancers!
I’ll get my Lifebouy…….
Rangers have decided to remove the Celtic support from the Broamloan stand.
This not to long ago. Safety certificate….
Was this a lie?
Snap…
By: Newsroom staff on 24 May, 2018 18:14
An unprecedented Double Treble and historic season for the Club has led to a phenomenal level of demand from supporters to be part of Celtic.
We are happy to reciprocate in terms of ticket allocation, something which will give us the opportunity to meet this huge demand to visit Celtic Park.
12) Is it possible to reduce the ticket allocation of the visiting Celtic fans and relocate them in tothe corner section, where the away fans of other clubs are currently housed?The fact that they are given a full stand at the expense of our supporters in the family stand isunacceptable considering how their fans behave and Celtic’s actions against our club over thepast several years. With the recent incident where a flare was fired at our goalkeeper, this issuehas become even more pressing.As mentioned at the AGM there will be no reduction in the short term. Dialogue on theissue will continue with Club 1872 and other supporter’s groups.
http://club1872.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/AGM-2017-QA.pdf
—————–
They could end up begging the away support to turn up.If the SG revolution does not go as hoped.
this is my take on the seating,trfc have 6/7000 tickets left to sell,tell the gullibles celtic are getting put in the corner,but once first game comes it will be
“we have listened to safety advice”and celtic will have whole stand as usual,sevco need the money,celtic have responded with a basically ,we don’t need your supporters,sevco will blink first,they are skint,
JINGSO.JIMSIEMAY 24, 2018 at 16:58
I also believe steps must be taken to ascertain whether any other SFA individuals were aware of what Mr Hughes said about Rangers supporters before he was appointed a non-executive director of the governing body in 2015.’
—————————
Meanwhile back at the ranch not long ago
————–
The Club is unsurprised that it has now finally been accepted by the SFA that the accusations made against the Club were groundless. The Club questions whether the time, cost and expense of this investigation was justified and was a good use of the SFA’s limited resources.
The Club will fiercely resist this reconstructed Notice of Complaint. Unfortunately, monies that should be available to Scottish youth and grassroots football will be diverted into another rehearsal of seven-year-old debates on the rights and wrongs of events that the SFA should have prevented at a time when doing so would have served a useful purpose.
It seems that Scottish Football is, once again, being directed by individuals intent on harming the Scottish game, Rangers Football Club and its supporters by pursuing a course that has no sensible purpose or reasonable prospect of success.
———————-
They really are a bunch of clowns down ibrox way.
TONY
MAY 24, 2018 at 18:49
==============================================
I don’t think that can happen Tony.
Both clubs currently sell season tickets without those games. If they now sell them with the games then there will be no facility to move people from that stand. If they have a season ticket covering the game they are entitled to go to it, and sit in the seat they paid for. There will be no place to move them to.
Sevco I believe went down this road with hearts a couple of seasons ago IIRC .
looks to me like more cost cutting as any away fans under 1000 need a vastly reduced police presence
The cynic in me says this is a desperate attempt to get up front money in from the sevco 2012 support and as a brucie bonus ,it looks like DK is listening to the support .
Surely DK is not looking to scarper with his pockets full before the season kicks off .
even I think that’s a conspiracy theory too far
Does anybody know if Stevie G has tv/media commitments for the coming World Cup in Russia . It begins two weeks into his tenure at Ibrox , at a time when he will be assessing his inherited squad and assimilating newcomers , and ends a couple of days after TRFC’s opening EL qualifier .
EASYJAMBOMAY 24, 2018 at 16:39
My reply at 17.41 was to your post .
FAN OF FOOTBALL
MAY 24, 2018 at 19:08
==========================================
A good point, cash flow is king when you have no credit available to you.
Selling your tickets for less because you need the money now. That rings a bell.
This won’t have a huge effect in actual income terms to either club I wouldn’t have thought, they will be able to sell the tickets for those games anyway I would have thought. It will really just effect when the money is received.
It’s easy to forget that DCK isn’t a director of the SFA member club, TRFC. Heck, even Dave does it!
Perhaps the new CEO will remind him of that?
Looks a bit like DK and the sevco 2012 support don’t have a great deal of confidence in SG abilities .
Wouldn’t they have been desperate to gloat over as many celtic supporters as possible ,when the SG revolution takes the title and stops celtic in their quest of 10 IAR .
Then again maybe they are just being pragmatic and thinking its better if there is only 900 laughing at you before you hit the subway
HOMUNCULUS
i don’t mean in that stand,though in that stand is their ultras(chortle) who are moved every celtic game
BFP, Thank you very much.
FAN OF FOOTBALL
it won’t be reduced,if anything they will need more,putting celtic fans in between trfc fans would be carnage,this is why i think it is nonsense,squirrel time
TONY
MAY 24, 2018 at 19:45
===================================
If they sell them tickets which include the Celtic games, which is kind of the point, then they have to have places to put them. Moving them back out of that stand for Celtic games really isn’t practical, where would they go.
Bearing in mind the stadium is full for those games already.
Harry Brady
@HarryBradyCU
Podcast nearly ready. Did you know we have £100m turnover and £30m in the bank for a rainy day
7:48 pm · 24 May 2018
HOMUNCULUS
they move them all the time,every celtic game,onion bears are moved ,to other seats or the louden,but so as not to go on and on,i don’t think it is going to happen
TONY
MAY 24, 2018 at 19:50
=================================
They move the ones who have Broomloan tickets which include those games, so they have to go elsewhere. They have a lot who don’t have that game included.
Let’s just wait and see what happens. I don’t think they will upgrade a load of tickets to all matches and then try to move the entire stand.
The relationship at Boardroom level between the two clubs is at an all time low so the news of a cut in the visiting teams allocations comes as no surprise.
SLIMJIM
MAY 24, 2018 at 20:03
The relationship at Boardroom level between the two clubs is at an all time low …
===============================================
What makes you say that, I wasn’t aware there were any particular issues at that level just now.
TONYMAY 24, 2018 at 19:48FAN OF FOOTBALLit won’t be reduced,if anything they will need more,putting celtic fans in between trfc fans would be carnage,this is why i think it is nonsense,squirrel time
=======================================
Ah Tony but you are assuming that sevco 2012 would take on the cost of more police as a club to ensure the safety of away fans (take the name celtic out of the equation ).
If I am indeed correct that there is a certain amount of police required for over 1000 away fans then that would be all sevco 2012 would have to take the brunt of the cost for ,it is then up to police scotland to foot the bill to ensure the safety of supporters.
Remember there were mutterings last term of sevco asking supporters to volunteer to be stewards at home games .How this could be done without scrutiny of training ,H&S and HR approval I do not know but IIRC it was a steward from the opposite side of the pitch that got to the confrontation with the sevco fan and scott brown first and if you saw the way the ibrokes steward dealt with a flare being thrown from the celtic support ,in both instances it showed a lack of professionalism in the set up IMO
SLIMJIMMAY 24, 2018 at 20:16
HOMUNCULUS 20.05
Sorry but i won’t say on here who told me this (more than one person) but believe me it’s 100% true. Before anyone replies and mentions the 2016 SCSF when according to a certain blogger DD was appalled at the celebrating Rangers directors & guests and decided there and then to “bury Rangers for good”. It didn’t happen, in fact DD left Hampden that day at the end of 90 minutes.
=======================================
That did happen, I have it on good authority. I have no particular interest in whether “a certain blogger” also said it.
That makes me tend to think you are bluffing with your “I know stuff you don’t” type posts. Like the one above.
SLIMJIM
hearsay is not fact,if you have no proof then it’s nonsense
SLIMJIM
MAY 24, 2018 at 20:29
===============================
“Wee boys games” lol, you do little else.
I was told by someone who was there. And no, I’m not going to tell anyone his name. I don’t expect you to either, I never asked you to and I wouldn’t expect you to.
Please feel free to believe what you want, particularly if it gives you some form of succour.
HOMUNCULUS:
I too can state, for the record, with 100% certainty, that it happened EXACTLY how it’s been reported on certain blogs AND in a national newspaper. it is a fact.
No money coming in from matchday sales.
Very little money coming in from merchandise sales, with the shirt shambles.
Unable to get the share issue up an running because of other problems.
Directors leaving, unexpectedly and without proper explanation.
I think FoF is probably right it’s a cash flow issue, with the added bonus of being popular with the support. The cash business needs cash now rather than in months to keep operating.
JAMES FORREST
MAY 24, 2018 at 20:38
=================================
Cheers JF, and I am pretty much certain that your source(s) and mine are not the same.
In fact I am so confident that I expect JJ to reveal it as an exclusive any time now.
BP / Tris that’s me done with this, promise I won’t get involved in circular arguments. I know people will be fed up with it already.
I’ll keep it brief. The decision today to restrict the ticket allocation in Govan must have been based on the record breaking home performances the liquidation deniers endured this past season. In all, with a full BroomLoan, they only dropped circa 18 points; including defeats to Hibernian twice, Kilmarnock, Hamilton & St Johnstone.
They won’t know what’s hit them at Celtic Park.
They could ask the likes of Manchester City, Barcelona etc. But they can’t get near their likes.
Instead, they could just ask SG how Celtic perform away from home in an hostile environment; just mention 20th March 2003. He should be able to read between the lines. But then, that’s old history. If you catch my drift.
Do any of you remember the correspondence between Celtic and the SFA?
The ONE AND ONLY criticism of the Hampden crooks?
All you fans of all other clubs in Scotland on here, please copy in your clubs criticism or one mild question about the Hampden Crooks.
Just One?
No, you and your clubs would rather justify cheating with pitches. Two disgraceful posters on here. Leave.
Anne Budge, Petrie, Lets hear one story of the their correspondence with Hampden. Just one.
The reason why Scottish Football is corrupt and lacks integrity is because it is allowed to be so.
Because all your clubs allow it. Yes You clubs other than Celtic!
Celtic at least asked questions. Their shareholders certainly did.
Who else?
Name one other! Other than our dearly departed.
NONE, there is NONE. Best posters on here aside. But it needs chairmen/women to come out and say it. So far they haven’t got the stomach. Or they all Masons.
woodsteinMay 24, 2018 at 13:22
‘….Hughes said in an interview last September: “I have no qualms whatsoever about what the association did and how it managed its matters through that period.”
__________________
Not an observation calculated to inspire one with faith in someone’s judgment!
I wonder if Mr Hughes would put his signature to an affidavit swearing that Charles Green bought Rangers Football Club ( of 1872 vintage) out of Administration?
And would he then be able to explain why Rangers Football Club of 1872 is (under its hastily changed name of Rangers 2012 plc) is in Liquidation?
Can he tell us where are the ‘holding companies’ which ‘ held’ Gretna FC and Third Lanark, and all the other football clubs which lost their entitlement to participate in Scottish Football because of ‘insolvency’?
Does he laugh at the ‘stupidity’ of Hearts for not doing a Craig Whyte/ CG stunt?
Who would want someone like Hughes as a non-exec director on their Board?
I have ‘no qualms whatsoever’ in calling him a fool of a man, at best.
Since Slimjims post at 20.29 there has been about 9 posts. Including mine. He got 11 thumbs down. Where are these cowards?
Speak up!
UEFA closing in, TOP and the courts too, picking a fight with the SFA and Celtic, and humiliating Gerrard. It’s being mooted elsewhere that King may be trousering a last pay off then will do walking away.
Whatever he does, Sevco have certainly at least tried to come good on their threat to bring Scottish football down with them. Why is King even allowed to speak? He is not the chairman. SFA?
Slimjim, DBD, I no longer care nor certainly crave popularity on this site. But as a Celtic Supporter I enjoy your contributions even although I often don’t agree. You are both civil.
Unlike others I could mention.
Jimbo; I always give myself a thumbs down. Self indulged Karma. And to be honest; I gave Slim one in error. Apologies to Slim. And one to you for your ‘masons’ reference. Hopefully we’re all above that stuff.play the ball, albeit on grass.
DBD, I’m in a bad mood. I’m going to catch up with ‘HUMANS’ on C4 to cheer me up. And Paddy.
Take care.
JIMBO 23.11
Thank you Jimbo.
You ok tonight?
Re-TU/TD dont worry or get angry, i don’t
STIFFLERSMOM
No problem.
Jimbo at 22.52
The reason why Scottish Football is corrupt and lacks integrity is because it is allowed to be so.
Because all your clubs allow it. Yes You clubs other than Celtic!
Celtic at least asked questions. Their shareholders certainly did.
Who else?
Name one other! Other than our dearly departed.
NONE, there is NONE. Best posters on here aside. But it needs chairmen/women to come out and say it. So far they haven’t got the stomach. Or they all Masons.
There was one, and you all (including Celtic) heaped scorn upon him, lapping up the MSM agenda.
I give you Vladimir Nikolayevich Romanov.
Ulyanova,
I stand corrected. He did call them out.
Never seen you on here before. You a Hearts supporter? You have several pals on here if you are. And me of course.
With all due respect to Stevie G , Jimbo , calm down, calm down ! You’re surely not saying that the CFC board knew nothing about the shenanigans at Ibrox prior to 2011 ? Lots of people outwith football were suspicious , and I would imagine that it would have been discussed at meetings of secret societies . Whether you like it or not , in the minds of many Scottish fans , you are twinned with them . Behemoths that the rest of us upset at our peril , such is the grip that you have on football here . Do you honestly expect clubs who exist to play football being happy to become collateral damage in your battle with them ? Seems to me that you control the game nowadays and they cling on in committees . Remember what happened to Raith Rovers when an honest man spoke up .
WRT your gripe about 3G, 4G or 5G pitches , I am definitely not a fan either but can understand the financial imperatives that drive clubs to use them .
I’d also like to say that I don’t give a monkey’s about CFC or TRFC except where it impacts on us . Two cheeks of the same arse sh*t*ng down on the rest from on high, and it’ll be the same again when TRFC can cement a solid second, only that there will be somebody else sh*t*ng on them . Rejoice ! You are in the ascendancy .
ulyanovaMay 24, 2018 at 23:18
‘….There was one, and you all (including Celtic) heaped scorn upon him, lapping up the MSM agenda.I give you Vladimir Nikolayevich Romanov. ‘
_____________________
To be absolutely honest, I kind of missed much of the Romanov ‘story’. I was aware of it in general kind of way, of course.
But I’ve just googled, and found this report by Roddy Forsyth in ‘The Telegraph’ . The link is:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/hearts/8601118/Hearts-owner-Vladimir-Romanov-to-be-reported-to-SFA-compliance-officer-over-online-rant.html
In that report there is this quote from Vlad
“We are standing in their way not letting them manipulate the game of football in the way they want”
Leaving aside the question of whether Hearts was a victim, we now know, from the 5-Way Agreement, that Vlad was actually right in his assertion that the SFA is prepared to manipulate the game of football in the way they want!
Whether Vlad himself was the clean potato or not is irrelevant: he accurately fingered the SFA as being dodgy.
And in the case of the by far much more important RFC(IL) ( part of the very fabric of Scottish society, no less, according to the then (Hearts- supporting) First Minister!), Vlad was proved to be right.
Paddy, It’s half past midnight. And you have just challenged so many of my core Celtic beliefs. I will need time to respond.
Take care buddy.
Catching up on yesterday’s news on here.
With regards the reduced away allocation: In principle I have no issue with the club reducing the away support if it is genuinly done in order to give our own fans more tickets; effectively looking after our own. That said, I’m not convinced this isn’t just another ‘squirrel’ to quote PMCG. A nice easy hitter for King to get the fans onboard at a time I suspect will include a lot of ‘targets’ rejecting Rangers as we don’t meet the financial expectations. It reminds me a lot of Charles Green’s promise to rename Murray Park. A very easy change to impliment that costs nothing to do but gets the fans onboard. I would be less cynical if it wasn’t being introduced by King (and everyone on here knows my views on him!).
To the poster who mentioned SG’s committments during the WC, I did wonder that myself. Surely the fact he is not starting until 1st June, and our first leg of the EC if 12th of July should mean he has absolutely nothing to do with television over that period? Could you imagine accepting a new job that the employer expects you to start immediately and stating “well I can’t actually start for 1 month. Oh, and I need to go to the World Cup for a month two weeks into my job. So I won’t manage that big presentation you need me to do as my first big challenge. But I’ll be back shortly after and then that will be me. Well, until the Champions League starts again then I might need to miss a few days covering Liverpool games”. I can’t imagine that would fly.
On the Hughes nonsense: I’ve said in the past when it’s been the other way around (Fury for instance) that we fans are far too precious little snowflakes at times and just look for ways to be offended and upset. He has never pretended not to be a Celtic fan, made the comment I am sure in jest many years before he became part of the SFA. I would look at any decisions he has made in that time and question whether they could have been seen to be biased, and considering I can see no evidence of that whatsoever then the whole situation should just blow over.
To Jimbo – your loved by most on this site, don’t let the haters get you down! And ignore the thumbs down – I think there are folk with multiple accounts logging in just to click a thumbs down. I just cannot see the likes of JC, AJ, Homincolous, Tri, EJ waiting patiently on a post from one of us so they can press the wee thumbs down button.
Jimbo, hope you woke up in a better mood mate!
I nearly responded to your attack on pitches this week – be fair here, nobody has broken any rules, hell I have a recollection that even the mighty RFC (IL) narrowed their pitch for a European game (was it against Leeds?). Strangely nobody gave a damn then, the whinging by Rogers after the Hearts game was just embarrassing. Celtic have ALL the advantages in Scottish football, a club raises the cut of the mower 1 cm and its a heinous crime – give me a break! Plastic… not a fan either, but its within the rules, and they do make money for the clubs. Given these clubs don’t have access to the obscene riches of the Champions League, they have to make money somehow. Of course, if the European money was more evenly shared they might not need the plastic pitch….
Now onto your attack on every other club not coming out and making statements against the Ibrox clubs. Sorry, but if Celtic truly wanted to get this sorted then they could have, they and they alone could have garnered the support of the other clubs. No club was realistically going to put their neck (and safety of their grounds – save the late departed and sorely missed Mr Hutton) on the line without having the nod that Celtic would be right behind them, and publicly so. Yes, I hate the fact that the Chairman of my club has come across as a spineless buffoon, yes he probably is toeing the party line from SFA/SPFL and I will always, always hold that against him. But, if he stepped up and was left hanging… The assurance obviously wasn’t there, or had never been discussed, or…..
But, if anything was going to happen, it had to be instigated by Celtic or at the very least clubs had to be assured that they would be immediately right behind them. I accept that for Celtic to publicly lead such a campaign would have been mistake for reasons which are pretty shameful in themselves (orange strips next time TRFC play at Parkhead anyone?). But, nothing happened…. lets not start blaming everyone else for the collective failure to ensure proper governance. Blaming everyone else is a speciality trait of another Glasgow club. All clubs are equally to blame, with the exception of Raith Rovers (although didn’t the Dundee Utd Chairman not speak up around that time causing the first “mass boycott”)
As someone who supported Hibs when they cut away allocations to accommodate demand from our own supporters I’d be hypocritical if I criticised Rangers and Celtic for doing the same but I do think the move will somewhat dilute the atmosphere of those matches.
I don’t really buy the pantomime feud and the this is a “get it up them” from either Rangers or Celtic tbh, it’s fairly obvious this is a commercially driven decision and reflects the fact that both teams have unprecedented demand for their season tickets. Put simply having the guaranteed revenue stream of season ticket cash up front as well as having an extra 6k fans in your CRM system come renewal time is good business when compared to reliance on on the day ticket sales.
This surge in demand for tickets is actually being evidenced across a number of clubs and it actually looks like something a bit special is happening in our game. For me the descent of the EPL into a “tourist league” has helped our game as people turn back to it looking for passion and authenticity.
I really hope the SPFL can harness this unprecedented interest to negotiate a record breaking TV deal and some proper sponsorship, we may never have a better chance.
I wonder what the TV companies will make of the the ticketing decisions of the big two in Scottish Football? Unlikely to be enamoured methinks…..
DBD
“well I can’t actually start for 1 month. Oh, and I need to go to the World Cup for a month two weeks into my job. So I won’t manage that big presentation you need me to do as my first big challenge. But I’ll be back shortly after and then that will be me. Well, until the Champions League starts again then I might need to miss a few days covering Liverpool games”. I can’t imagine that would fly.
It might if your club is not actually paying his wages.
Huge amount of TDs given out from late last night till early this morning, but no replies challenging the posts to indicate why, other than one or two responses that aren’t really challenges. Even John Clark got what must be a record number for him on a post that hardly flies in the face of what the blog stands for.
The TDs themselves don’t matter, of course, but the volume given to pretty uncontroversial posts does seem to indicate a large number of ‘visitors’, perhaps?
TAYRED.
“Celtic have all the advantages.”
Craig Levein would disagree with you there, or at least he did when he was manager of Dundee United. After one of the most disgraceful refereeing performances in Scottish football history which saw his team cheated out of points against Rangers(IL), the interviewer asked a visibly raging Levein, “Are you saying this happens every time your team comes to Glasgow?” Levein snapped back, “No! Every time my team comes to Ibrox!” (And that wasn’t even the match where Rangers(IL) were awarded 3 penalties against Dundee Utd.)
Levein showed remarkable analytical skill in being able to distinguish between ar*e cheeks. ‘Remarkable’ because in spite of the revolving door between Ibrox and Park Gardens, in spite of former Presidents at the SFA being caught cheating against Celtic, in spite of Hugh Dallas, in spite of Dougie/Dougie gate, in spite of a Sevco employee controlling football media output in this country, – need I go on? – the perception seems to persist that they ARE two cheeks of the same ar*e, or so we are assured by some people.
Its pretty lazy analysis.
ALLYJAMBOMAY 25, 2018 at 10:30
Not sure of the specific posts in question but as a general point I would suggest a mix of thumbs up and thumbs down would be a very positive sign that this website is flourishing. I’ve lurked on this page for years and started to comment occasionally a few months ago purely because I felt there was a danger of “groupthink” taking hold at times. Many posts were bland generic “Rangers bad” ones with 50 TU, then along came one of the few brave bears who venture on here with equally bland “Rangers good” or “Celtic bad” posts to an immediate onslaught of 50 TD.
Perhaps more of a mix of responses to each post is a good sign that the site is reaching a wider cross section of people and the readers’ opinions are becoming more nuanced?
It’s equally likely that it’s just daft trolls trying to annoy people with a thumbs down right enough. 😉