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.
CROWNSTBHOY
MAY 26, 2018 at 15:31
=====================================
Season ticket sales were around 43,000 last season, however average attendances were around 49,000.
If they sold another 7,000 that would be season ticket sales of 50,000.
However for increased income purposes you compare that to the average attendance. Bering in mind average attendance really means seats sold in football statistics.
The income boost would be based on 1,000. Bearing in mind the Celtic tickets were being sold for £49, a lot more than you would expect if the game is included on a season ticket.
UTH 15.25
Indeed he does, however it wouldn’t be a factor when making a decision in his position as Vice- chairman of Rangers fc.
Homunculus
BFBPUZZLEDMAY 25, 2018 at 19:46============================== ==
Seriously, it isn’t an income issue in my opinion, it’s a cashflow one. They need the money now, not more later in the season.
That’s the point I was trying to make (clumsily it appears).
Thanks for explaining it much more ably.
CROWNSTBHOY
MAY 26, 2018 at 15:51
===============================
I totally agree it’s a cashflow issue rather than an income one.
With no overdraft or credit and the shirt sales being put back until at least August then cash has to be brought in now. There will be little coming in over the summer. Bearing in mind how much they would have expected from shirt sales. That would have been paying the bills.
However if it works then matchday income will be a lot less as the cash will have been collected up front. 7,000 tickets at say £25 a time (I’m taking the VAT off as that belongs to the exchequer) is £175k per home game.
SLIMJIMMAY 26, 2018 at 15:47
Indeed he does, however it wouldn’t be a factor when making a decision in his position as Vice- chairman of Rangers fc.
===========================
Needing cash quickly to pay back loans and bills would be a factor though, in the meantime pleasing an element of the support whose only answer to their team constantly losing to Celtic is to demand action against Celtic fans. When Rangers were financed by the Bank of Scotland and then by money belonging to the taxpayer they inflicted a few convincing defeats on Celtic at Ibrox, and there was no wailing about getting rid of the Celtic fans then.
I think CFC should release their orange top first .
Just a wee input on the reduced allocation for Celtic supporters at Ibrox.
While, on the face of it, a reduced away support might reduce the security/safety element of a normal football match, it might not work that way in one involving two sets of supporters that hate each other to the level we see at a TRFC v Celtic game.
At the moment, with 7000 Celtic supporters filling one end of Ibrox, the police only need to ensure the two sets don’t meet up and this will be easier (I imagine) when one whole end is taken up, as, I again imagine, the Celtic support are moved in one direction, with the bears going in another (or maybe three others). The new arrangement, though could/would result in the Celtic support being caught between two sets of, quite likely, very angry TRFC supporters, so the police job might actually be doubled in size.
Then there is the possibility that the worst element of the TRFC support might view 1000 supporters as a much easier target than 7000, creating an even bigger problem for the police, even if it’s only a potential problem.
I have no knowledge in the area of crowd safety, nor of how the police currently handle the movement of both sets of supporters away from Ibrox, but if there was any truth in the previous claims of Dave King that it was the police that preferred to give over the full stand to the Celtic supporters, this might be one of the problems the police were thinking of.
I don’t know if what I say is in any way realistic, but I do know that I would feel much safer in such a situation as one of 7000, than as one of only 1000.
Now I’m not suggesting that any more serious trouble will come about as a result of this reduced allocation, but it might require in an increased police presence, rather than a reduced one, to ensure that it doesn’t.
PADDY MALARKEY
MAY 26, 2018 at 16:50
I think CFC should release their orange top first .
==================
You is bad PM !
Could you imagine a 3rd or 4th strip, in Orange – perhaps with green piping? Another generous example of CFC’s commitment to social inclusion.
I think the bear’s heads would just explode.
Apparently DJ is available for airport transfers.
‘It could be anything from showing people around Auchenhowie to picking players up at the airport and hopefully I will be a face that folk recognise. I will help where I can at the various golf days and charity events and I am really looking forward to it.’
Does any one have his number? Asking for a pundit. #Chris Sutton
ALLYJAMBO
MAY 26, 2018 at 17:06
================================
How do they deal with the Aberdeen support visiting Ibrox AJ. As I understand it there is little love lost between those two supports. In fact at Celtic Park the Aberdeen support are known to sing of hating Rangers more than “you”.
Though I’m not sure if it means they hate Rangers more than they hate Celtic, or that their hatred for Rangers is more vociferous than that of the Celtic support.
PADDY MALARKEY
MAY 26, 2018 at 16:50
I think CFC should release their orange top first .
===============================
What about socks
“During the Battle of Britain between Celtic and Leeds in the European Cup, Celtic was asked to change their socks by the referee because he didn’t want both sides playing in them. With no alternative socks, Celtic’s opponents Leeds would provide them with orange socks for the night. For one-night-only Celtic played in the green and white hoops, white shorts and orange socks. They won the 3-1 on aggregate over the two legs. We wonder if the change in socks helped their cause.”
HomunculusMay 26, 2018 at 18:55
ALLYJAMBOMAY 26, 2018 at 17:06================================How do they deal with the Aberdeen support visiting Ibrox AJ. As I understand it there is little love lost between those two supports. In fact at Celtic Park the Aberdeen support are known to sing of hating Rangers more than “you”. Though I’m not sure if it means they hate Rangers more than they hate Celtic, or that their hatred for Rangers is more vociferous than that of the Celtic support.
________________
While I acknowledge there’s plenty of animosity between those two sides, I really don’t think it matches the hatred felt between supporters of TRFC and Celtic, and I’m certainly unaware of any Dons fans stabbed to death for wearing their club’s top. I think the religious factor between the two Glasgow clubs adds something more than mere football ‘hatred’ bred from on-field rivalry, albeit rather nasty on-field rivalry. What’s more, although an Aberdeen victory at Ibrox might result in the Dons finishing above TRFC, it hardly carries the humiliation that yet another pasting from your greatest rivals does, nor does it smash to pieces their belief in their supremacy over their Catholic inferiors. In addition, almost to a man, the Aberdeen supporters will be heading to their buses and out of Glasgow, not heading for local public transport.
As I said previously, I’m not saying there will be any more trouble with the reduced away support, just that it doesn’t necessarily result in a reduced police presence, as I could see 1000 Celtic supporters as a more attractive target for the worst elements of the Ibrox bigots than 7000 might be.
Homunculus @19:46
It is also an accepted tenet of football economics that match day spend is much bigger per single-ticket attendee than per ST holder. Man United in fact used that in the 00s as a reason for limiting ST numbers.
Lao widely held that match day spend on more important games is less.
Not to say that Rangers fans aren’t outliers in that dataset, but I’m not so sure the decision is related to a recent marketing exercise.
I have never harboured any particular affection for Liverpool FC.
And I have generally subscribed to the view, the obvious view, that football is a team game.
But , my goodness, how important was the individualistic brilliance of Bale on the one hand, and the statistically unbelievable and calamitous performance of Karius.
Overall, a huge effort by Liverpool to come back from the Youtube comedy goal, nullified by Bale’s glorious overhead kick, and cruelly weakened by an astounding, inexplicable inability of a CL-level goalie to properly parry ( or maybe even catch) a really long distance, true-flying, unbending shot.
One wonders at the vagaries of the football life.
ALLYJAMBO MAY26 19.35
That’s a couple of times you have mentioned the potential for Celtic fans to be targeted by the “Ibrox bigots” due to their allocation being reduced.
I take it you will raise a similar concern regarding the safety of the Rangers support from the “Parkhead bigots” should Celtic reciprocate in kind as i expect them to do.
Only fair to do so imo.
Slimjim
Your whitabootery is based on a false equivalence -singing illegal racist and anti catholic songs as well as organising marches with logos of violence against CFC supporters are all highly expressive signs of the mindset of A large number of TRFC followers.
The illegal racist anti Catholic songs are directed to me as one of their targets. I had thought that times were changing for the better in those respects and it is appalling that the fans of the new Rangers have stepped up their activities in these unacceptable behaviours. Some of that is simply consequent on the great lie that Rangers have been victimised but I suspect that there is an element of the consequences of the exhaustion of Christian social capital.
The religious divide mentioned above is an easy label for what is a rapidly changing situation. Practising Christians have been coming together in many ways for the past several decades and I would suspect that they are very much in the minority among the two supports. If there are so many Protestants in the TRFC support as there claim to be I wonder how many of them know what they are protesting about?
BP 22.30
I’m not denying that my club have a section of the support who do us no favours with their religious intolerance and singing of songs that have no place in society far less inside a football stadium. Having said that it is not all one sided The hanging, execution style, of effigies inside Celtic park allied to the “know your place h** scum banner at Hampden last season not forgetting the sad orange b******* chant aimed at various Rangers managers throughout the years including PLG a practicing RC would tend to prove this point.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/resources/images/7843337/?type=responsive-gallery-fullscreen
Fans would be better not taking up any of the allocation as the action has demeaned the sport, if a new 6 year old club cannot take the verbal thats comes with playing with the big boys they should take their baw and go away somewhere else.
SLIMJIM
MAY 26, 2018 at 22:09
Although it gives me no pleasure to do so, I want to acknowledge the embarrassment I have felt at some of the Celtic fans’ recent behaviour at Glasgow derbies. Most specifically the hanged blow up doll effigies of Orange men. A lot of us would do better to attempt to understand why Rangers’ supporters are so angry, and if we can’t admit this we have no business feeling morally superior. Incidents like that one, and my experience of what I consider closed minded attitudes on Celtic message boards genuinely caused me to question my long held belief that Rangers have a sectarian problem, a hate problem in fact, that is multiple orders greater than that of Celtic.
After analysing the whole situation, which was enabled by my Timposter, undercover presence on both of the main Rangers* message boards I concluded that the difference actually is one of degree (obsessed, perhaps, but it’s very very enjoyable) Rangers* fans are just more stringent about conformity, and their “middle ground” ends up far more extreme.
At this particular time they have entered into almost insane levels of besieged frenzy. It’s a classic example of group paranoia, which is a manifestation of disempowerment. Realising that you are a fading anachronism is not easy, but the few voices in Rangers cyberspace who actually call for modernisation and rationality are being shut down more and more. Right wing extremists are taking full control over there. It’s more than sad.
What do you do when you have been so utterly trounced and humiliated by your hated adversary, and can see no way of that changing? You cling to moonbeams.
And ban the opposition fans from rubbing your nose in the yawning chasm between your teams. It’s really nothing more than that.
bigboab1916May 26, 2018 at 23:05
‘…if a new 6 year old club cannot take the verbal thats comes with playing with the big boys they should take their baw and go away somewhere else.’
________________________
First, of course, they have to be told that they ARE only 6-years-old!
And should appreciate the fact that they were offered any life at all in Scottish professional football in being accepted into membership of the SFL.
And realise that their (actually, lying) pretensions to be a one-hunert-and forty-whatever-year-old football club do not serve them well.
Those who by the 5-way Agreement made whores of themselves by denying self-evident truths also did not, and do not, serve them well.
And as for the Chair of RIFC plc, he has proven to have been, and continues to be, the most unhelpful of all the many chancers who have looked to make their personal fortunes from the dead carcase( is that the right spelling?) of RFC (IL).
We really do have to continue to try to sort out the SFA as our primary focus, though.
It simply does not do to have a governance body that thinks it is empowered to abuse its function.
We look to the new CEO to change things.
The best thing the new CEO could do for Scottish Football is make the 5 Way Agreement public.
Full transparency on who said what and more importantly why.
Only then will there be a consensus for moving forward.
I say this because it’s been a bone of contention for most and the catalyst for much of the distrust flying about 6 years down the line.
What has he got to lose by doing so?
I would like to know yer thoughts on this if possible and thanks in advance for doing so.
realshocksMay 26, 2018 at 23:11
‘..Realising that you are a fading anachronism is not easy, ‘
___________________
That is a perceptive phrase, realshocks.
We know how humiliating it is to have a national team which is nowhere in the rankings.
And how hurtful it is for our club teams to have to go through hoops of extra games to get into ‘Europe’.
But we can only dimly perceive the mental state of the RFC support when their club did a Gretna.
I myself can scarcely get a grip on it.
To go into extinction after a hunert and etc years! Unthinkable.
To find that you are not in fact the essence of things, or even the very fabric of society, is a bitter, bitter blow.
No wonder some ‘learned friends’ choked on the idea ,and dreamt up ghostly essences of ‘what it is all about’ and other such balderdash!
To be a ‘fading anachronism’, to be a past creature, to be essentially irrelevant except as a historical curiosity, must indeed be painful.
I think you’ve got it in one!
JustTheFactsMay 27, 2018 at 00:18
‘..The best thing the new CEO could do for Scottish Football is make the 5 Way Agreement public.’
___________
Agreed.
But of course all the parties to the agreement have been sworn to secrecy!
I’m reasonably sure that no actual living goat was sacrificed
The only thing on the sacrificial altar was the innocent lamb of ‘integrity in sport’.
Of whose blood the SFA drank ,cynically and corruptly.
And there is not a board in any football club in membership of the SFA which does not know this.
The wife and I wAtched the game at our local in NYC: it was a good game…And was telling a friend from Monaco that I rated Bale and hoped he didn’t join the game…
But his first goal was stunning!
A goal to win any tournament, IMO
REALSHOCKS MAY 26 23.11
Firstly i’d like to thank you for both your reply and acknowledgement that outwith Rangers other teams also have unsavoury elements within their support. I really appreciate this.
In return, i tend to agree with you that there is a siege mentality at work within Ibrox, born out of a sense of frustation, anger & being unable to compete due to the incompetence of various individuals.
Finally i will disagree with you regarding your final remarks. There have been talks about reducing the allocation for Celtic and bringing them into line with every other away support in terms of numbers. This has been a long drawn out process and precedes the various “tankings” we have suffered in the past 18 months or so.
FAO BFBPUZZLED.
.A word of advice, Whilst he is “printing out your words” before “stuffing them down your f****** throat” i would get my headbutt in first.
You have now been targeted by the exiled one.
Don’t worry Homunculus, you still get a passing mention.
So that’s Real Madrid champions of Europe for the 12th time. Apparently they are not the most successful club in the world though. That must be a real bummer for them in the cold light of day.
REALSHOCKSMAY 26, 2018 at 23:11
13
27 Rate This
SLIMJIMMAY 26, 2018 at 22:09Although it gives me no pleasure to do so, I want to acknowledge the embarrassment I have felt at some of the Celtic fans’ recent behaviour at Glasgow derbies. Most specifically the hanged blow up doll effigies of Orange men.
——————
the hanged blow up doll effigies of Orange men.
———-
where the dolls men? Did they have a bowler hat and a sash? what makes a blow up doll hanging look like an orange man is all i am asking?
—————
A lot of us would do better to attempt to understand why Rangers’ supporters are so angry,
—————-
We know why the ibrox fans are so angry. They let their club die,they let every spiv spin them of moonbeams and billions to come. They were duped but were told by many they were being duped but they did not listen.They are so angry because we told them and they did not believe.They are so angry that with every passing year they are still being duped and they still refuse to listen.They know we know they are being duped but they are so far gone they are to scared to look reality in the face.
Some information on anger.
——————–
https://www.mind.org.uk/information-support/types-of-mental-health-problems/anger/causes-of-anger/
Why do I get angry?Feelings of anger arise due to how we interpret and react to certain situations. Everyone has their own triggers for what makes them angry, but some common ones include situations in which we feel:
threatened or attackedfrustrated or powerlesslike we’re being treated unfairlyPeople can interpret situations differently, so a situation that makes you feel very angry may not make someone else feel angry at all (for example, other reactions could include annoyance, hurt or amusement). But just because we can interpret things differently, it doesn’t mean that you’re interpreting things ‘wrong’ if you get angry. How you interpret and react to a situation can depend on lots of factors in your life, including:
your childhood and upbringingpast experiencescurrent circumstancesWhether your anger is about something that happened in the past or something that’s going on right now, thinking about how and why we interpret and react to situations can help us learn how to cope with our emotions better. It can also help us find productive strategies to handle our anger. (See our page on managing anger for more information).
—————
sorry for the long post
On the 5 Way Agreement question it would appear that The 2angers shareholders hold the aces when it comes to the possibility of getting the facts disclosed on this clandestine agreement?
https://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/how-can-the-terms-of-the-sfasplrangers-5-way-agreement-be-discovered/
SLIMJIMMAY 27, 2018 at 08:38
There have been talks about reducing the allocation for Celtic and bringing them into line with every other away support in terms of numbers.
————
I don’t know what the ibrox fan base will be reduced to at celtic park. It may bring them into line with every other away support in terms of numbers.But my understanding is each club has talks and they agree how many tickets the away fans get.
So just asking a question here
What if say Aberdeen ask for more tickets for their fans at celtic park,could they then take a bigger away support to celtic park than the ibrox club? And if they do would this not then in a way from anyone looking in clarify Aberdeen to be the sceond best team in scotland behind celtic.They finish second in the league and take the biggest away support to celtic park.Not the kind of picture the ibrox board and fans would enjoy much.
Last one from me….who said thank God?
——-
JUSTTHEFACTSMAY 27, 2018 at 09:37
—-
Every time i see The 2angers
Big smile
BIG PINK
MAY 26, 2018 at 20:51
It is also an accepted tenet of football economics that match day spend is much bigger per single-ticket attendee than per ST holder. Man United in fact used that in the 00s as a reason for limiting ST numbers.
========================================
That makes sense, at least intuitively. I would have thought that people who went to a stadium once or twice a year rather than every home game would be likely to make a day of it, spend more money and buy souvenirs, favouring the official club outlets. Those with a season ticket would be more likely to just go to the game with friends.
I have been to both Old Trafford and Anfield as a “tourist” supporter with my boys and we spent more than we would have done visiting Celtic Park.
When I say “We spent” …
The one question I keep asking asking myself is why the 5 Way Agreement was agreed to remain a private matter when it in affected all the Clubs in the League set up?Were the reasons for doing this because the agreement might have breached the Rules/Laws or Regulations that Governed all Clubs up to and beyond this point?
Thats a genuine question not an accusation btw.
Not being a Legal person myself I am trying to look at this logically and objectively from the outside.
Having looked into the Rules pertaining to the Legalities of Incorporation of Clubs and the resulting demise of Rangers Fc via Liquidation I fail to see how granting this New Entity instant access to the League Setup as the same Entity could be justified by those entrusted to apply the Rules and Laws of the game in Scotland?
So it takes me back to the starting point again
.Why the cloak and dagger appproach to what should be a straight forward application of the Rules?
Over to you MrMaxwell ?
Make it public and “inspire” a Nation of football fans.
CLUSTER ONE
MAY 27, 2018 at 09:49
============================
I would have thought everyone will get the away section now, rather than discussing amounts for individual clubs. Logistically it just makes sense, both in making arrangements for the away support and in deciding what seats can be used for season tickets and what needs to be held back for visiting supporters.
Gordon Waddell’s article pretty much covers what we have been discussing over the last few days and comes to similar conclusions.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-only-cutting-celtics-allocation-12600028
JUSTTHEFACTSMAY 27, 2018 at 09:56
The one question I keep asking asking myself is why the 5 Way Agreement was agreed to remain a private matter when it in affected all the Clubs in the League set up?
===================
If we had a media in this country willing to ask questions it would have become public years ago in my view. Two points from it seem clear though
– There was a guarantee of no trophy stripping no matter what wrongdoing was proven.
– There was a guarantee the SFA and the league bodies would treat the new club the same as the one which was liquidated, even though the law of the land simply doesn’t allow for that.
It leads me to ask what else they would be prepared to rig to the benefit of ‘Rangers’?
UPTHEHOOPS
MAY 27, 2018 at 10:29
– There was a guarantee the SFA and the league bodies would treat the new club the same as the one which was liquidated, even though the law of the land simply doesn’t allow for that.
======================================
They didn’t though, they said it was the same club but their actions gave lie to it.
I’ll repeat the basic questions I put a wee while back and which we have been asking for years.
How was the SFA membership transferred from one club to the same club, that doesn’t even make sense. If it was the same club it was already a member.
Why was the same club not seeded in the SFA’s own tournament the following season, after having finished second place in the league (which it was no longer a member of for some reason).
Why did the same club have to apply to join the SPL, then when it failed the SFL.
The SFA and the two league bodies (as was) treated the new club as a new club. Whatever they publicly stated
JUSTTHEFACTS, our football authorities are fond of making use of ‘or otherwise at the discretion of the board‘ when it suits them, eg temporary SFA membership, yet they claim following QC’s advice that they can’t charge Rangers* for a decade or so of industrial scale cheating because it’s not covered in their rules and regulations! No board discretion considered in that matter apparently.
The Scottish football authorities are corrupt. They’re just the facts.
On the ticket allocation debate can I ask for some clarification? If clubs are able to sell more STs and therfore bring in more immediate money, how and when can they access that new money? I understand that the money from STs only becomes avaiable when each home game is played. I.e. in 19 separate tranches.
There have been suggestions that this money would satisfy a clubs need for immediate money as it has a cash flow problem. How does that work?
HOMUNCULUSMAY 27, 2018 at 10:09
4
0 Rate This
Gordon Waddell’s article pretty much covers what we have been discussing over the last few days and comes to similar conclusions.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-only-cutting-celtics-allocation-12600028
—————–
In amongst all that nonsense, you’ve also got the Gary Hughes debacle with the SFA.
The club’s indignation was statement manna from heaven, demanding suspensions and enquiries.
—————
Ok then let us look back at the LNS enquiry.
what is that you say? Hello! hello are you there,do you still want us to look back?
slimjimMay 26, 2018 at 22:09
ALLYJAMBO MAY26 19.35That’s a couple of times you have mentioned the potential for Celtic fans to be targeted by the “Ibrox bigots” due to their allocation being reduced.I take it you will raise a similar concern regarding the safety of the Rangers support from the “Parkhead bigots” should Celtic reciprocate in kind as i expect them to do.Only fair to do so imo.
____________________
Strangely enough, I expected this sort of response from yourself, and did think of putting in an explanation as to why I’ve written it from an Ibrox match perspective, as opposed to a Celtic Park one, but decided the post, which wasn’t meant to be too long, could do without it. I did hope that people would work out for themselves that the potential is the same at either ground, though very much less likely at Celtic Park. I then hoped that anyone posting their thoughts would base them on the subject matter only, that is the effect that the reduced away supports might have in the way I suggested.
Basically, I do not consider there to be the slightest chance of TRFC getting within touching distance of Celtic for quite some time, and even then, only if some sugar daddy comes along with magabucks, so it is very unlikely that the tinderbox situation I am thinking about would occur at Celtic Park. An unlikely victory for TRFC this season at CP is more likely to be viewed by the Celtic support as a bit of a sickner than a humiliation, and they’ve got lots to hold on to that will give them comfort without resorting to taking advantage of the small crowd of bears.
I acknowledge that every club has it’s proportion of mental b**tards that are ever ready to kick off, and there’s every possibility that the proportion is exactly the same at Celtic as it is at TRFC, but as things stand, it is highly unlikely that the Celtic support are going to be anything other than euphoric at the end of a Glasgow Derby, unlike their counterparts at Ibrox who have been undergoing utter humiliation for over six years, not only losing games, but losing their incredibly overblown superiority complex to boot (but not having the self awareness to recognise it, and so it is rebuilt with every overblown statement from their club’s board, particularly in the build up to their next meeting with their hated rivals).
Lastly, my post under scrutiny was not about how potentially violent either set of supporters are, but about the circumstances that might lead to the police not viewing a smaller away support as necessarily a good thing, and it matters not who the ‘bad guys’ might be, there is going to be 1000 supporters having to be safely escorted from a ground with, potentially, the dregs of circa 50,000 (more at CP) (proportionately a bigger number than the 43,000 plus of last season) wanting to vent their spleen on those they hate most! Whatever way you look at it, wherever the match is played, 1000 is potentially a softer target for the bully boys than 7000; and bully boys like soft targets.
Gordon Waddell was doing so well in his article, speaking truth to power and all that but there was a wee fly kick at the SFA non-executive director when he posited that the director’s position was compromised by what he said 12 years before. A story brought forth by intrepid DR reporters over a decade after the event.
HOMUNCULUSMAY 27, 2018 at 10:36
Didn’t a lawyer for the SFA argue in one of the court cases Rangers were simply an ‘idea’, which the Judge had difficulty accepting? This ‘idea’ seems to be what they base the same club argument on.
JustTheFactsMay 27, 2018 at 09:56The one question I keep asking asking myself is why the 5 Way Agreement was agreed to remain a private matter.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
I agree with what you say JTF.
In his own words to BBC Sports Regan said:
“I would argue that there is a greater degree of transparency [at the SFA]. There are always going to be times when documents are signed under confidentiality [arrangements], it’s the same in any business. [The five-way agreement] was one of those.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35056808
This is absolute codswallop from Regan. Confidential documents can be redacted. Simply attempting to cover up sensitive or embarassing information by applying Confidentiality to everything is unacceptable. There are many websites dealing with the topic of redaction and I wonder if any of SFM reader has knowledge of this from a commercial/financial angle.
But firstly I believe the the SFA must be challenged to demonstrate how transparency is dealt with. The supporters and others are getting a raw real in my opinion. The SFA website has a Governance Section which is pretty thin on Commercial arrangements; the word Transparency does not appear in the latest Annual Report [2016], which is disappointing, yet we read:
We are investing more heavily inresearch and partnering with groupssuch as Supporters Direct Scotland toensure that the biggest single sourceof revenue in the Scottish game – thefans – are listened to and their needsare factored into every decision we make.
(my underlining)
Some immediate changes could be adopted at SFA, including making available, redacted where necessary to remove personal data, sensitive financial information:
Minutes of Board and Committee Meetings; AGM; Contracts (for all major receipts and payments) ; Licence Consideration; Disciplinary Hearings. A modest start could be made with the relatively easy paperwork, to open the door as it were.
Given the history of this organisation, it will take a serious amount of goodwill on behalf of the SFA to achieve the accountability & transparency that is needed to build trust and satisfy fans that everything is above board. I believe that change is still required at the SFA institutional level to ensure it is fit for purpose.
WEEJOE
MAY 27, 2018 at 10:55
===================================
Sorry Joe but why would they only be able to use the money when the games are played.
I understand that a season ticket holder is a creditor, starting at the price of the ticket and reducing as games are played. They are no longer a creditor when the last game is played.
However I don’t understand why that means they can’t spend the money as soon as they get it.
CLUSTER ONE
MAY 27, 2018 at 09:32
They did have a sash on.
weejoeMay 27, 2018 at 10:55
On the ticket allocation debate can I ask for some clarification? If clubs are able to sell more STs and therfore bring in more immediate money, how and when can they access that new money? I understand that the money from STs only becomes avaiable when each home game is played. I.e. in 19 separate tranches. There have been suggestions that this money would satisfy a clubs need for immediate money as it has a cash flow problem. How does that work?
__________________________
I don’t know how it works, Wee Joe, but it can’t do any harm to have that money in a bank account, where it could well make the difference between trading while insolvent, and being somewhat solvent!
One thing’s for sure, if this latest wheeze is finance driven, then they really are close to the edge.
SLIMJIM
MAY 27, 2018 at 08:38
It doesn’t matter when it started, Jim. It’s pretty sad either way. Most of your supporters are now locked into a full on battle with Scottish football, and Scotland in general. The only reasonable gripe is that Celtic get a full stand at Ibrox and Rangers only get half a stand at Celtic Park, but that’s because CP is a bigger stadium. There are more Rangers fans at CP than Celtic fans at Ibrox. But is it reasonable to cut the allocation for every opponent to 800?
Hi Homunculus, thanks for your answer. I must be mistaken. I thought that I had read somewhere that ST money was held in a seperate account and cpuld only be ‘earned ‘ as each home game is played. I’m obviously having a false memory. Happens when you’re 68.
Ex LudoMay 27, 2018 at 11:09
Gordon Waddell was doing so well in his article, speaking truth to power and all that but there was a wee fly kick at the SFA non-executive director when he posited that the director’s position was compromised by what he said 12 years before. A story brought forth by intrepid DR reporters over a decade after the event.
___________
He did point out, though, just how mild an insult it was in comparison to the words both sides usually use.
He could have asked, though, just why it’s come to light now? To deflect from the deflection of a deflection, perhaps?
Slimjim
Thanks for the heads up, I appear to have been accused of something I did not do and explicitly said I was not doing including reference to it being a “simile nothing more nothing less”.
As to violence, particularly of the physical type, not for me thanks. Luckily my head is 95% bone and 4% mucous so I am well protected.
REALSHOCKSMAY 27, 2018 at 11:29
I’m still asking.
HomunculusMay 27, 2018 at 11:12
WEEJOEMAY 27, 2018 at 10:55===================================Sorry Joe but why would they only be able to use the money when the games are played.I understand that a season ticket holder is a creditor, starting at the price of the ticket and reducing as games are played. They are no longer a creditor when the last game is played.However I don’t understand why that means they can’t spend the money as soon as they get it.
____________
There has been the suggestion on here that the money should be allocated on a game by game basis, but I am not sure whether this is a legal requirement (I think not), or is just considered good accounting practice. It does seem highly unlikely that TRFC have only been releasing ST money for working capital on a match by match basis, as they’ve been running out of cash, and requiring loans, as early as November.
I have spoken to supporters of Motherwell, Hibernian and Hamilton who have had the misfortune to follow heir teams to Ibrox in recent seasons. They all independently confirm that for the duration of their stay in the corner enclosure they have to constantly dodge missiles in various forms. Apparently very common on matchdays at Ibrox for visiting fans. Things like coins, lighters, pies etc all rain down on opposition fans in this area. This is always going to be a concern when opposing fans are housed one on top of the other but it seems like the stewards, who are now recruited from the rank and file, are quite willing to let this happen without recourse. Celtic FC have a duty to ensure the safety of their fans and whilst boycotting may be an option fans who wish to travel to games at Ibrox should always feel that their safety has been taken seriously by all concerned.
Reading Slim Jims whatabouterry re envisaging trouble at Celtic Park being the same as Ibrox I would ask the following:
When was the last time a Celtic fan approached a TRFC player on the pitch during a match?
When was the last time a TRFC player was pelted with missiles after scoring against Celtic at Celtic Park?
You are becoming more and more desperate to remain relevant in Scottish Football and the only weapon left at your disposal is keeping the ‘2 cheeks of the same arse’ narrative alive. Well its gone now and gone forever and Scottish football will be a better place for its demise.
“We’re in a position where we need to bring in new deals and that’s what we are focusing on”
—
As a governing body we have to make tough decisions and some people won’t like them.
———–
Look’s to me that as a governing body it’s all about the deals and cash in on the feelgood factor.
we don’t want to rock the boat on anything that may hamper the feelgood factor and the cash deals.
ALLYJAMBO
MAY 27, 2018 at 12:15
==============================
I think it’s deferred income for accounting purposes.
Season Ticket holders are creditors, they start at the cost of the ticket and that is reduced as the games are played. They are no longer creditors when the last game is played.
However I don’t think that means they can’t spend the money when they get it. It is just shown as a liability in the balance sheet.
The above may all be nonsense.
BFBPUZZLED
MAY 27, 2018 at 11:50
=====================================
I wouldn’t worry overly much about the offer of violence, have you seen him. Not exactly a healthy looking specimen I’m afraid.
EX LUDOMAY 27, 2018 at 11:09
Gordon Waddell was doing so well in his article, speaking truth to power and all that but there was a wee fly kick at the SFA non-executive director when he posited that the director’s position was compromised by what he said 12 years before. A story brought forth by intrepid DR reporters over a decade after the event.
============================
I remember a few years back during yet another debate on sectarianism in Scottish football. Walter Smith freely admitted as a young man he had sung the songs at Ibrox but urged the present day supporters to refrain because he now believed it to be wrong. No-one demanded an inquiry into his past deeds or demanded he be suspended from the game because of them. The SFA Director nonsense is in my view part of some PR plan to portray the SFA as anti-Rangers when the day of reckoning over the European Licence issue comes. Any person involved with the SFA who has any connection to Celtic, or is a supporter, can expect the hounds to be on their trail, no matter how long ago any perceived misdemeanour was.
Putting celtic fans in the corner at ibrox.
Leigh Griffiths will be happy, only 3 corners points he has to worry about now when taking a corner.
HOMUNCULUSMAY 27, 2018 at 12:30
Ah , but he may fall on top of BFBPUZZLED . Tha’s gotta hurt .
when you know one of gods choosen creations is sometimes barking up the wrong tree and howling at the moon and your at your wits end trying to get through to it, throw it a jerky can sometimes be the answer.
If only The 2angers International Space Station Football Club thingymaboab had a line of Credit from a Bank?
Life would be soooo much easier for them.
HOMUNCULUS 12.26
I must admit to being in the WEEJOE camp when it comes to my understanding of access to ST monies. I thought that when purchasing a ST you were entering into a contract in which the club guaranteed you access to all league games played during the season. As each fixture was fulfilled then a portion of ST money was made available to the club as that part of the contract had been honoured. Could be nonsense of course but this was was my understanding.
12.30
Trying to regain your position at the top of the hit list i see. Having said that you do know that was “The Mench” at the awards ceremony. That is clearly not the physique of a martial arts expert not to mention a ex-bouncer who could eject the most unruly clubber with one finger or a ex junior footballer who played at the highest level.
REDETINMAY 27, 2018 at 11:12
Totally agree with all of that cheers for your reply bud.
SLIMJIM
MAY 27, 2018 at 13:39
So in your view if I buy a plane ticket, or pay for a holiday in advance then the company does not have access to money. They keep it in a separate bank account until the holiday is over.
How does anyone ever lose out in those situations then. The company can simply repay them the money as it hasn’t spent it yet.
I’m sure a bean counter will be able to sort this out in no time.
PADDY MALARKEY
MAY 27, 2018 at 13:34
============================================
I would be more concerned about whether the ninja’s were there or not.
How would you even know … until they struck.
HOMUNCULUS
on the season book money,i would say you pay your money to the club,there is a level of trust between both parties,if the club should go bust mid season then there will be 50,000 people looking for money for the remaining home games left on book,wether that’s considered a football debt i don’t know,so you give the club a few million before season starts and they get a couple of players in.
p.s. this is just my thinking of it
TONY
MAY 27, 2018 at 14:17
=============================
You’re right, season ticket holders are unsecured creditors in an administration. If the club makes it to the end of the season then they are effectively paid off as the club has provided them with the service they paid for.
SlimJim just wants people to think the cash flow argument has no merit.
£11m of Sevco related money has to find its way into a UK escrow account. A bird in the hand, is worth two in South Africa, as far as TOP are concerned. I suppose it’s possible to say, that until that is done, nothing, nowhere, will be happening with regards Sevco’s trading future.
Likely?…..Who can tell?…But deffo a possibility.
It’s a lot of money, for a guy who hasn’t got a penny to his name, to find.
That, and the “assurances” provided to the SFA,(extent unknown) that keep the lights on money was readily available, to fund the expected operational circa £3m losses, this coming season.
Compounded by having to add an un-budgeted management crew to the payroll, TOP court costs, with possible Compliance Officer related costs in the pipe, and a share issue with associated costs to cough up.
All the while, the nagging thought that the £3m+% due to Close Finance, is secured against stadium closing assets, must all be considered. Especially while the UEFA FFP monitoring period is an open window.
Quite a heavy workload, for a full board of directors, but with two RRM walking away mysteriously, one of whom a lender, an added burden.
The new jersey not being launched until August-ish, (maybe) hasn’t helped,(Europe might be over, if begun, by then) impacting potential sales.
A more devilish guy than me, could probably put up a good argument, that Sevco have added the Celtic game to the season ticket value, because they fear the second home match, might not be a sell out, at £50 a pop. (Not after another 2 game 9-0 aggregate score) In the cash flow cycle path of a fitba club, that second game usually arrives right in the middle of boycott season, when the Winchesters need to be “encouraged” to point outy ways.
That “encouragement” has started, and the season hasn’t even begun yet…. It will be a season not without difficulties……
But then again, without £11m in an UK escrow account…….Mebbe no !
Homunculus
I should imagine that ludicrous offers of physical violence do not really add to the persuasiveness of an argument or credibility of the author.
Personally I appear more like GK Chesterton than GB Shaw.
SLIMJIMMAY 27, 2018 at 15:05
Not at all. i simply don’t believe this decision is based on a urgent need for money. As i have said previously this has been discussed between the club and supporters for a considerable time.
===================================
I know that, there was even a fundraising exercise, an online poll, and a plan to do some leafleting. I believe at least one of the leading lights in the campaign met with Stewart Robertson to discuss it and was told there was no appetite within Ibrox for it to happen.
The question is, after Dave King said it wasn’t going to happen and cited safety certificates etc as the reason what has changed their minds now and forced the total u-turn.
Given other surrounding circumstances, the fact Rangers are a cash business with no overdraft, the shirt sales shambles (money which would have been expected now), another loss making season ahead, directors leaving etc the most logical inference is that the club needs money now rather than later in the season.
I am absolutely comfortable with you disagreeing, you are entitled to your opinion of course. I would expect nothing else.
“When RFCPLC sold its business and undertaking to Sevco Scotland ltd this included the one share that RFCPLC held in the SPL LTD.”
So if the share was sold as included in a sale to Sevco did the SFA/SPL have to buy it back to give it to Dundee or did they just confiscate it?
Too many at the madam on the Sevco issue attempting to keep the old club relevant, the old club died when its CVA was refused a refusal that kept a Mr King happy, as he wanted it boycotted and the rest is the chapter titled show me the deeds Mr Green.
HOMUNCULUS 15.25
You are correct so far as there being little appetite when reps first met with Stewart Robertson.
I have been informed (no names you know the score) that DK played little if any part in this decision and it was driven by Douglas Park.
The club would have of course have known when the existing retail deal/s were expiring and budgeted accordingly to take this into consideration imo. Income from retail for the upcoming season will provide the club with a welcome boost to the finances.
CORRUPT OFFICIALMAY 27, 2018 at 14:32
——-
And 50/1 for SG not to be in the ibrox dugout for the start of the SPFL season i have read
Income from retail for the upcoming season will provide the club with a welcome boost to the finances.
Nice and rosy again what a club every base covered. No panic at this club, nothing to fear from TOP, seen and heard some shite in my time. Yet to meet a club who pisses off sponsors and has to seek new avenues but cannot release the new sponsors deal until the old deal is fully dealt with but the new promised milk and honey jam tommorow money will be great.
Sevco are a Mickey Mouse outfit conning and using every trick to lie and decieve in the knowledge they have a compliant fan base who have backed themselves into a corner in their opinions regards their sense of entitlement and nothing will change their opinion as it will show them as weak, in behaving like this they do not see the irony that is they are weak, and they have a backward mentality and superiority complex that allows them to be fleeced, let them think the field they are in is full of promise and green grass and they will fatten themselves for the fleecing and slaughter.