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.
Phil is on fire 4 posts today.
TheLawMan2June 4, 2018 at 18:39
“Again, i would like people to consider if the boot was on the other foot here. Forget about Celtic for a moment. If Ian Maxwell is found to hold a Non Exec position on one of Kings companies tomorrow, and that this issue was withheld as the SFA couldnt see a conflict of interest, do you believe that is FAR WORSE than Jack McGinn or Gordon Smith or Rod Petrie holding positions in the SFA ?”
Would appear some are quick to take the side of the hanging judge and condem a man who has not committed one single act to date. COI.
So lets really take it into the realms of what above board should really entail and it is that there should be nothing that can be shown to show that a favourable side may be taking in any scenario that would favour one over the other.
That would be the gist of COI, no advantage or any hint or suspicion.
“The bigotry, the bile, the sectarian undercurrents and innuendos must end. Such hateful attitudes have had their day. They poison the well of community life. They must be excised and cast out once and for all.”
Mr Kearney sent a letter to the SFA last week demanding Mr Dallas’s dismissal if the accusations over the e-mail were true.
He said yesterday that “tasteless” e-mails may simply be “the tip of a disturbing iceberg of anti-Catholicism in Scottish society”.
This is King territory and the media in Scotland.
Homunculus
He regards Barcabhoy as his intellectual equal so “faithfully transcribing” cannot be far away. The root of plagiarism is the Latin verb for kidnapping which is quite apposite given the propensity to look for ransom money.
Fair use appears to be an idea unknown to the exiled one.
Hopefully that is clear enough given his claims about you having a brain cell shortage and my having a stunted education. I can only guess what his password protected compendium of conspiracy theories contains.
Regarding Gary Hughs…….think Paul67 on CQN more or less said there would be a sacrificial lamb ( not the succulent type ) today in his article…….do Celtic maybe maybe have a wee plan going here …as in yes lets really look into things kike this , yes lets have a big independent enquiry then Mr King ??
TheLawMan2June 4, 2018 at 17:15
You mention McLennan did not make full disclosure. Do you know that as a fact or did he make partial disclosure?
Are you questioning his motives for keeping any COI hidden from fellow Board members?
That is, had DK said nothing, McLennan could secretly have voted in a way that suited his interests and by extension Dermott Desmond’s and so Celtic’s?
Is that why he failed to disclose fully so that he could serve Celtic?
Or was it just an administrative oversight like the one Rangers did for over ten years of non disclosure of ebts?
I think you guys are getting dangerously close to legal redress in what is clearly a mud slinging exercise for reasons that should become clear in the fullness of time. Mud splatters.
roddybhoyJune 4, 2018 at 22:11 (Edit)
0
0 i
Rate This
Regarding Gary Hughs…….think Paul67 on CQN more or less said there would be a sacrificial lamb ( not the succulent type ) today in his article…….do Celtic maybe maybe have a wee plan going here …as in yes lets really look into things kike this , yes lets have a big independent enquiry then Mr King ??
===========
Did Hughes not vote against Celtic’s request for an investigation of the SFA handling of Rangers use of ebts?
If his replacement is less likely to take the same view (if he comes with no conflict of interest of course) then perhaps it is part of a wee plan.
Nice thought but when it comes to being sneaky Celtic are not even going for a single never mind a double treble.
Do you know who I would recommend to replace Gary Hughes?
Rod Stewart.
Not Irish tick
Not Catholic Tick
Not a person of significant control at a member club Tick
No conflict of Interest tick
Not involved with Dermot Desmond tick
Was better at making the cup draw than that wee guy from Cove Rangers Tick
Perfect
BFBPUZZLED
JUNE 4, 2018 at 22:09
Homunculus
He regards Barcabhoy as his intellectual equal so “faithfully transcribing” cannot be far away.
=========================================
Would Barca not have to read it out to him, or send him an audio recording, for him to write it down in order for it to be considered “faithfully transcribing”.
Or am I just being archaic.
I don’t know, but I seem to remember that Chairpersons don’t normally have vote? Except in a ‘casting’ vote situation?
This seems to be going over the head of many. One single person on a board or committee do not have dictatorial control.
There were rumours that Regan organised the latest two jaunts for Scotland off his own back. Some people at the SFA were enraged. Regan left.
Brown envelopes were not mentioned.
SFA do not test players for drugs.
Celtic test all their players for drug use.
Why the difference?
Any answers anyone?
Maybe Graham Spiers could answer the question.
Go on Graham, find out all the ins and outs of drug testing in Scottish football. I dare you.
No? too scared?
What about you Keith? Union? Hugh Keevins (I’m desperate now).
OK BFDJ, Jabba.?
OK lads, go back to your normal easy life, safe in the belief that you are admired the world over.
Have a restful sleep.
jimboJune 4, 2018 at 23:25
SFA do not test players for drugs.
Any answers anyone?
Is it because you would have to be on drugs to play for Scotland?
A propos the tightening-up of FPP, I was caught by this:
“Tuesday May 18 2018 Milan granted UEFA licence”
By Football Italia staff”
——–
” Jun 2018 6:06 PM
AC Milan to be banned from Europa League next season ”
http://www.millenniumpost.in/sports/ac-milan-to-be-banned-from-europa-league-next-season-302427
_________________
That looks interesting.
The dodgy boys of the Italian equivalents of the SFA’s ‘licencing committee’ made one decision, but perhaps the UEFA boys will overrule it?
Maybe there is some anxiety in the RIFC plc/TRFC Ltd camp? Perhaps the SFA’s licensing committee’s view on TRFC Ltd’s entitlement to a licence might be seen to be unsound?
Maybe fear of that has tipped King over the edge?
Maybe FPP is beginning to bite bums.
BFB, your earlier post sparked a wee memory for me viz plagium- theft of a child under Scots Law.
Auldheid @22.29
I did read somewhere that he did indeed vote against Celtics request for an independent enquiry. Celtic baffle me Auldheid , they are in a position to do so much more for the good of the game but appear to be unwilling to do so , Perhaps because no other clubs seem to give a s##t about rules , corruption etc . Playing the slow game is all very well and good but how long do we have to wait , just feel things are getting out of hand with Rangers and King . He is openly mocking Scottish football with no consequences , it cant be allowed to go on like this
Bigboab,
However, I will remind you that it wasn’t until wee Strachan finally relented and started playing all the Celtic players that we looked as if we could do something. Too late, sad to say. Hope McLeish has learned a lesson.
I would hate to think that drug testing in Scottish Football (or the lack off) is never questioned in the Scottish media because some of their heroes are participants.
roddybhoyJune 4, 2018 at 23:46’….Celtic baffle me …they are in a position to do so much more for the good of the game but appear to be unwilling to do so ……Playing the slow game is all very well and good but how long do we have to wait ..’
_________________
Celtic clearly believe that the demolition of the whole dirty Big Lie is not solely their responsibility.
They seem also to believe that they would not be at all supported if they pushed for the full truth to be known, such is the grip that the now liquidated club has on the psyche of Scottish Football.
I would not ask them to make a sacrificial lamb of themselves ( there are too many lamb eaters around, and we have seen them in action very recently)
The ills of Scottish Football ( of which there are many) require a level of commitment to truth and honesty on the part of the majority of clubs , a commitment which was sadly lacking when Turnbull spoke truth, and which has been consistently lacking since.
The SFA are probably now realising that they have let a Fox into the hen house.
A non UK resident loonball with an axe to grind.
Get swinging ya madman.
Marvellous.
??
jimboJune 5, 2018 at 00:01
‘I would hate to think that drug testing in Scottish Football (or the lack off)..’
_____________________
While looking for an email response I received earlier in the year about the SFA’s ‘drug testing’ programme ,I came across an old ( 2013!) email I sent to a newspaper chap.
“Grateful for your courteous reply.
I try to be reasonably balanced in most things.
But this whole saga , to relatively innocent citizens like me, has revealed things about our society that have astonished me.
Not least being the devious nexus of connections between, say Jack Irvine and the Daily Record in the media world, sundry ‘magic circle’ lawyers and such like, and a whole nest or nests of highly dodgy ‘businessmen’.
I would not expect you to confirm, but I think it is highly likely that you will have seen the possibility-at-least of there being, or of there having been, connections between an Interpol-wanted bad guy and some people associated with RIFC (etc) at Director level .
I also accept that Leveson might figure in newspaper editors’ minds.
But with one or two exceptions, no one in the print media is really digging into what could be a story of complicity in fraud, money-laundering and general corruption in Scottish Football.
The medium of radio ( BBC Scotland all the way down the scale to Clyde) has not only, it seems, NOT tackled the story but has (instance James Traynor and others), been a propagandising part of it!
It seems that there is real fear of nasty retaliation if a journalist goes beyond the trite, superficial questioning of the SFA and the publishing of press statements from one particular club.
One burning issue that no journalist has, as far as I know, raised: the terms of the 5-way agreement!
There should be a barrage of questions about that whole deal.
Who in particular was involved? Did the whole Board of the SFA know in advance, or were they presented with a fait accompli?
Were any SPL clubs paid ‘compensation’ to stop them greeting about losses sustained because of RFC’s behaviour?
We have to bear in mind that the SFA gets quite a whack of tax-payers’ money.
They ought to expect to be challenged, and challenged directly, about their whole administration..”
I make this comment now tonight,
The succulent lamb eaters of 2012/13 are in 2018 so utterly addicted to ‘lamb’ that they slavour after even the disgusting lamb poo that King offers them.
On the coaching licence issue there are many examples of young managers working towards their badges being allowed to manage. Here is one I posted earlier to Twitter.
https://amp.theguardian.com/football/2008/jun/24/blackburn.inceunveiling?__twitter_impression=true
Since posting this and 2 others it appears as though John James has deleted his fake news from his site. The story was like most of his. Completely made up.
This new TRFC manager is arriving with huge expectations generated by the SMSM and bears… because Gerrard was a world class player.
Yet I just realised that both Gerrard and our very own Derek Johnstone have something in common.
Both were offered Club ambassador roles at their home clubs.
Johnstone signed on at TRFC last week.
Gerrard apparently declined the role at LFC.
He preferred the manager role at Ibrox.
Just saying…
Now that King and his immediate allies in the media have successfully got rid of their target in the SFA, I imagine the spiteful campaign which has started against Murdoch MacLennan will continue until he too decides it’s just not worth the hassle. Who will then become the next target and will it continue until all vacancies at Hampden are filled with people King approves of? Will Ian Maxwell himself be next to be targeted? Many in the media already seem irked that Peter Lawwell thinks he is a good appointment.
Perhaps things won’t rest until Gordon Smith is back as SFA Chief Executive, Campbell Ogilvie returns as President, and Hugh Dallas returns as head of Refereeing. Donald Findlay could replace Murdoch MacLennan as Chairman of the SPFL and Stewart Robertson could take over from Neil Doncaster. Darryl Broadfoot could return as head of SFA PR and Jim Traynor could head up SPFL PR. No-one, absolutely no-one with any link to Celtic at all will be allowed to hold any position of governance. For all other positions Graham Spiers will head an interview panel to determine how honest and trustworthy they are, but having a Rangers background will be a distinct advantage, because Rangers minded people are socially and morally superior to all others.
Perhaps King and his media lap poodles would be happy if all that came to pass.
On a scale of 1 – 10 in the Hampden misdemeanors list, I would rate Gary Hughes about a one. Ogilvie, Regan, Doncaster, Bryson, Smith and a whole host of others would be rated around nine or ten.
(They have been called a lot worse and it wasn’t tongue in cheek.)
But of all the miscreants, who actually resigned for their ‘sins’ ?
It seems that succulent lamb journalism not only still exists it may even be worse. Why is this allowed in this day and age. I always stated that this same club myth was always going to be maintained by smsm and the liquidation of RFC totally ignored. SC verdict has never been punished or properly addressed which is absolutely incredible. Confirmed cheating and ignored. This new club is becoming more toxic than the old under the leadership of a convicted criminal. This could only be allowed in Scotland I am sad to say.
“JOHN CLARKJUNE 5, 2018 at 00:30
roddybhoyJune 4, 2018 at 23:46’….Celtic baffle me …they are in a position to do so much more for the good of the game but appear to be unwilling to do so ……Playing the slow game is all very well and good but how long do we have to wait ..’_________________
Celtic clearly believe that the demolition of the whole dirty Big Lie is not solely their responsibility.
They seem also to believe that they would not be at all supported if they pushed for the full truth to be known, such is the grip that the now liquidated club has on the psyche of Scottish Football.”
Here we go again… John, you may well speak the truth for all I know, but it could also be the other way round – Celtic have told the other clubs that they are driving this so be quiet. Lets face it the SPFL/SFA convinced the clubs that armageddon was coming if they lost Rangers(IL), imagine the pressure they could put said clubs under if the threatened to stand up against both Celtic and Rangers (of whatever form).
The usual comment here is it is only Celtic that are doing anything. I haven’t seen anything to prove that. Whatever is going on, if anything is going on, is all behind closed doors. We are only fans, of course, we just pay for everything… no need for transparency here
Re : TOP/Potential Share Offer
Just how long is it going to take for the TOP to act ? There must be shareholders in RIFC who wish to plan ahead (financially) & at the moment that is impossible – I don’t mean just large shareholders such as the Easdales etc but one (a strange one) comes to mind of Glenmuir Knitwear who , from memory bought 1m shares – if I was an owner/shareholder in Glenmuir I would be itching to get my hands on £200K just to get out of this car crash .
Maybe DCK’s thrashing & lashing out at anything is a smokescreen for what’s coming from the TOP but jeezo its turning out to be a slow , painful business obviously to get DCK to make a share offer .
Tayred, Did you not read the correspondence between Peter Lawwell and Stuart Regan? PL blasted the SFA out the water.
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/1538380/celtic-sfa-peter-lawwell-stewart-regan-rangers-sir-david-murray-craig-whyte-trial-evidence-judicial-review/
“Celtic were the only club to ask for an SFA review into the handling of EBTs” – Regan.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/scotland/41228081
The CO review into the licence issue was driven by Celtic shareholders. How much co-operation they received from Celtic I don’t know, you would need to ask Auldheid, although I think he likes to keep a lot of that area confidential.
But all the other clubs need to look inwards at what their boards are doing. Even their fans. The only ones I have seen making any sort of noise is Aberdeen supporters.
One club you would think would have Celtic’s back would be Hibs. But with that piece of work Petrie at the top. Words fail me. They should take the lead from Celtic supporters in the early nineties and demand ‘Sack the Board!’
Celtic might not have done enough, but they have done something. On their own. With no support from the rest of Scottish football.
Newsflash
=========
“SG for the England job”.
End of Newsflash
===============
Two points.
Gary Hughes has not resigned. He is not seeking re-election. In some ways this seems similar to football fans who are fed up of the poor governance of the game, and have turned their backs, scunnered.
Celtic are not the only club to have raised concerns with the SFA about the misuse of the authority’s powers. To accept Regan’s word that they are isolated and alone seems at odds with questioning his honesty in other areas.
If only Scottish Football could come together again like they did in 2012 with the threat of a season ticket boycott.
A focal point at that time was the Rangers Tax Case site. Of course it ceased to be after the result of The FTTT. And despite setting up a replacement with TSFM, the steam seems to have gone out of it all for a lot of people. Back then in the 2010? – 2012 period it was all new to us. It was breathtaking on an almost daily basis.
Since then, it has been one disappointment after the other, apart from the Supreme Court ruling. But what effect did that have at Hampden? How many sackings, or resignations? Nothing. Business as usual.
I think that apart from us on here and elsewhere, who don’t want to let it rest and keep reminding anyone who happens to pass by, there is a mood of resignation throughout the football world in Scotland. Some things never change.
Personally I take heart from what John Clark says often enough. The truth will come out some day. I just hope I’m around when it happens.
Berussiabeefburg, OK I’ll give you that, he did not resign. The AGM was only days away so rather than resign, he decided to not stand for re-election. It amounts to the same thing he has voluntarily given up his post. Have any of the other miscreants done similar?
Regan? Oh dear Oh dear, what to believe! You have put doubts into my mind. Should I believe Cambell Ogilvie was “heavily conflicted” and had to recuse himself from many discussions at Ibrox? (Source: Stuart Regan)
*discussions at Hampden.
STEVIEBCJUNE 5, 2018 at 04:12
I wasn’t aware BIG DJ was back at the Rangers. Although his input on Radio Clyde would suggest he’s never been away. Was Mark Hately a secret ambassador at one time ?
Walter in court again ?
LORD BANNATYNE
STARRED MOTIONS
30 minsA264/11 Pail Motion v CherylBinnieBTO Solicitors LLP
Party
CA84/17 Walter Smith v NeilCaisley &c
Drummond Miller LLPBBM Solicitors
Jimbo
But all the other clubs need to look inwards at what their boards are doing. Even their fans. The only ones I have seen making any sort of noise is Aberdeen supporters.
…………………………………………..
Plenty of other clubs fans making noise. Hearts guys on here and on kickback. Most other teams forums will have a Sevco thread.
I’ll agree it seems to be only Celtic minded bloggers on the case including your pal.
I cant believe that a bit of pressure from Dave King is enough to make heads roll???
I think you could easily draw parallels with The SFA handling of the Rangers crisis as you could the Govts handling of the Banking Crisis.
Regulations were not followed or correctly enforced.
Rangers approach to finances was doomed from the start(Private Debt the issue)
The bending of the rules was overlooked
No one did time for the mayhem that was created
The SFA have done very little to stop it happening again
Those at Ibrox some of whom were involved in the original disaster have learned very little and from the outside look like they are making the exact same mistakes all over again.
living outwith their own means and looking for someone else to pick up the tab.
That someone else of course being the tax payer/paying supporter in the street/stands.
The only thing that stopped the Government in their tracks was Brexit.
The only thing that will stop the SFA is paying supporters taking tae the Exits.
If this new drama does not seem to be getting resolved as it should then the only option left is for supporters to boycott any SFA run or controlled games.
Scotland,Scottish Cup ties etc
Like Brexit this will hammer home the message loud and clear.
Supporters control the future of Scottish Football not them the part time unelected custodians who control of the game.
For the simple fact of the matter is.
Without fans Football is nothing.
Let us all see who does what in the end?
let the cards fall where they may but remember and don’t ever forget this You and I hold all the aces here.
We have always held the best hand.
Your call SFA.
As for Peter Lawwell and those in control at Celtic don’t think we will judge you any less should this all go Pete Tong?
I guarantee you we will be among the first to call your bluff.
Same as before.
The rebels will win.
Bill, I appreciate that fan forums call out the usual villains. You couldn’t get better than the two Jambos on here, one of whom goes to court along with JC. (The other one is a lazy sod who can’t be bothered coming up from England, but a good poster nonetheless).
But the point I was making about Aberdeen fans is the banners and wee demonstrations they make occasionally. That’s 5 stars from me.
Is there a problem with this bit of tongue in cheek?
Justthefacts,
“The government has incurred a loss of £2.1bn after selling another tranche of shares in Royal Bank of Scotland.”
(BBC)
I wonder how much tax payers money is lost over the years. Thatcher & co selling off British Telecom, British Coal, British Steel, The Electricity Industry, The Gas Industry, The National Airline, The Railways, British Leyland, The Post Office and so on and so on.
It must be in the trillions.
And of course we subsidised Rangers as the cherry on the cake.
Sutton United and Boreham wood to be invited to that shite cup that Welsh/league of ireland/Non SPFL clubs play in.
Cross border league anyone??
Jimbo, yes all fair and good. Personally, I don’t take any of that as proof that some, most, all of the other clubs have done nothing at all, which is what is oft posted here. Most do not believe anything that Regan says, so why should we believe him now? We simply don’t know, largely cos all clubs are terrified of the consequences so everything (anything?) is being done behind the scenes.
Hell mend them, they have all colluded to produce the beast that TRFC/RIFC have become, with King firing off salvoes at will with everyone apparently powerless to do anything. Someone is going to have to stand up to them at some point, or we are going to reach the fabled armageddon after all – be it through crowd disturbances, UEFA sanctions who knows…. You can be sure King, like all bullies, won’t be anywhere to be seen when the brown stuff finally hits the fan
Speaking of conflicts of interest.
https://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/petrie-survival-and-gary-hughes/
There might be very clever and astute businessmen involved in Scottish football but does that mean they are wise?
In setting the two edged sword of conflict of interest running don’t they see nothing can work any more?
What price the Judicial Panel Protocol if it is ignoring internal possibilities of non compliance?
What price the club licencing system that allows clubs to take a punt on UEFA money to pay back the loans taken out to get at that money?
What price the Resitance to Persistence to get an investigation into possible governance is misdemenour that takes 5 years to even get the issues examined.
Why is it only in Scottish football we even need a Web site called Scottish Football Monitoring.
Why are we playing sophistry tennis on the rules when the very court the game is played on is disintegrating?
There is now a lot hanging on the JPDT at end of June. If the laws of the game are used to stifle the spirit of it, we might as well walk away.
PADDYMALARKEY 10.53.
https://www.ftadviser.com/regulation/2017/10/09/ex-rangers-manager-smith-sues-financial-adviser/
AuldheidJune 5, 2018 at 12:58
‘……we might as well walk away.’
__________________
What I find truly remarkable is that the small-to-medium enterprises that are the members of a couple of business organisations have sat back and watched the undermining of the future of their individual businesses by the base actions of those elected to the boards of those organisations.
The sport of professional football is rotten at heart, and made so by those whose responsibility was, is, to maintain the integrity of that sport.
What would be the point of paying money to watch a rigged game, when the rigging has been effected by the very governance body? Why would any businessman maintain a sports club, only to play in a sport in which no sporting truth and honour exists? Where cheating is not only unpunished for some, but positively indulged in by the Governance body?
Our clubs are like the satraps of Al Capone: afraid to assert their rights, and the cause of right, against arbitrary power. They live in fear of the possibility of getting whacked by a baseball bat, if they were to call for an end to the Big Lie.
We, the fans, might indeed decide just to walk away, and let their businesses die slowly. Bugger them all!
‘The great unwashed’, might be considered a very inappropriate thing for anyone involved in the governance of Scottish football, regardless of who it’s said of, but I wonder if someone like, say, Stewart Robertson, ever sang a song with the words, ‘up to our knees…’ in it! Not saying he ever lowered himself to that level, even as part of a crowd in full swing, but it must surely now be the case that all office bearers within Scottish football governance should have their every utterance, over, say, the past 12 years, examined for disparaging remarks about supporters of opposition clubs!
In all seriousness, of course, I am not suggesting that any sort of witch hunting should be considered, but, within Scottish football, the words, ‘the great unwashed’ are almost a compliment in comparison with the general lexicon of Scottish football banter. Compare those words with, ‘Glib and Shameless Liar’, for instance, now there’s words that should have caused great consternation throughout the game, especially as, in this case, they were truly accurate and fully deserved.
BIGBOAB1916JUNE 4, 2018 at 22:00
Would appear some are quick to take the side of the hanging judge and condem a man who has not committed one single act to date. COI.
So lets really take it into the realms of what above board should really entail and it is that there should be nothing that can be shown to show that a favourable side may be taking in any scenario that would favour one over the other.That would be the gist of COI, no advantage or any hint or suspicion.
____________________________________________________________________________
Never said anything of the sort. In fact i was very clear in saying that the issue is not the existence of a Conflict of Interest, its the non disclosure of it thats the issue.
Dave King has no issue with Lawwell or Riley being on boards in the same way Lawwell has no issue with Stewart Robertson being on boards.
Your statement above is completely flawed and not representative of anything i said or anything i believe im afraid.
THELAWMAN2
JUNE 5, 2018 at 13:44
[moderated]
I’ve yet to hear what Hughes and McClennan have done to help Celtic. The fact that you’re wasting your time defending King’s outbursts suggests that you are as credulous as so many bears about all of this.
Celtic don’t need to derive any unfair advantage. They are just a relatively big, well run club who will continue to thrash Rangers*, especially as the bears are so easily distracted.
Re conflict of interest , shirley there must now be a register of all officials who are or have been
a) members of masonic or other secret organisations
b) season ticket holders at any football club.
paddy malarkeyJune 5, 2018 at 14:12
Could we also add any official of any club who own shares in another or has passed shares to family members,or maybe any official who supplies coach services to other clubs for cash.Surely a real COI if there was one.
JIMBOJUNE 5, 2018 at 11:40
Justthefacts,
======================================
The fact is the Government hasn’t lost a single penny.
It is us Joe Public who footed the bill.
The bill created by people who operate on a different moral compass than most of us.
Neoliberalism/Capitalism is a con trick.
Designed purely for the benefit of big business and the 1% who control the bulk of the wealth.
The people we vote in and entrust to ensure all is well and above board are simply in there to skim what they can from the top.
Be that through sitting on Boards of Companies who get the big Contracts through Privatisation or through off shore investment schemes rubber stamped by theirs truly.
No different from the suits who control Football,be that at National,European or World Level these guys are in there to bulk out their retirement funds.
Morally corrupt individuals who give not a single fuq how their decisions or indecision’s affect you or I.
The 5 way Agreement is the root of all the current issues within the Scottish game and until this issue is resolved then I don’t see how it can ever truly move on and recover?
That Agreement served one purpose and one purpose only.
Keep the Rangers fanbase involved in the game.
They took the oldco jobby rolled it in glitter then sold it to the MSM and Ibrox masses as a Lamb Kofta.
Succulent Glamb if you like.
REALSHOCKSJUNE 5, 2018 at 14:12THELAWMAN2JUNE 5, 2018 at 13:44
[moderated]
I’ve yet to hear what Hughes and McClennan have done to help Celtic.
_____________________________________________________________
[moderated]
Ive not said or suggested anywhere that either have done anything to help Celtic or anyone else. For all i know, McClennan could be a Rangers or Hearts or a Rugby fan.
I say again for the 4th time, its not the existence of a COI that is the issue here, its the disclosure of it.
PADDY MALARKEYJUNE 5, 2018 at 14:12
4
0 Rate This
Re conflict of interest , shirley there must now be a register of all officials who are or have been a) members of masonic or other secret organisations
__________________________________________________________
Pretty sure that would break the GDPR laws.
Morally corrupt individuals who give not a single fuq how their decisions or indecision’s affect you or I.
The 5 way Agreement is the root of all the current issues within the Scottish game and until this issue is resolved then I don’t see how it can ever truly move on and recover?
______________________________________________________________________________
Would like to understand how the 5WA affects you or i and how its the root of all current issues. The content of the 5WA clearly doesnt change anyones views on a singular issue so i cant see how it can be causing current issues.
Lets say they ripped it up or deemed it illegal, nobody on either side would change their views. It would still be the same debates ONLINE as the ones today.
I speak to lots of fans who have never even heard of the 5WA. Its only prominent on Social Media so really cant understand how it can resolve the “apparent” issues in Scottish Football.
Celtic have just completed a historic back to back treble, completed a historic run under Brendan Rodgers last season and got in CL proper again. Aberdeen have been challenging in last 2 seasons. Motherwell and Killi have been rejuvinated under current management. Hibs under Neil Lennon have had a cracking season. Hearts have opened up a new stand thanks to a huge investment from fans. Attendances in the last 2 seasons have been the highest for a long long while.
What negative impact has the 5WA on all of the above?
For information. This was asked on Twitter in relation to the SFA charges of non compliance.
Out of curiosity who sits on the panel to hear the #Res12 denials from dead rangers, and does representative’s of the Liquidators BDO have to be in attendance, as a claim from Celtic shareholders should affect the payout pot..
and answered with
There is a list of folk with right kind of expertise that are used to form the panel. One extra member should be a representative from UEFA who knows not just the UEFA FFP rules but the intent behind them. That would make it as squeaky clean as football could manage.
================
Now how better to prevent any conflict of interest by doing what Res12 originally asked and getting some input from UEFA?
Makes sense to me. Make it so.
TheLawMan2
June 5, 2018 at 14:49
I say again for the 4th time, its not the existence of a COI that is the issue here, its the disclosure of it.
=================================
And for the … goodness knows how many times …. you saying a COI exists doesn’t make it true.
You are basically saying that DD is in a position to coerce MM to do things in his role in the SPFL because DD is a shareholder in a PLC that MM provides non executive director services to.
You are saying this as if MM was an employee of a private limited company which DD owned.
Those are two entirely different scenarios.
Again we are getting away from the real point. If Dave King had real concerns who would have asked Stewart Robinson to take the matter up with the SPFL board, or he would have written to the SPFL himself to raise them.
Not put out public confrontational statements.
I wonder why the clubs you list weren’t competitive before? I wonder if dumping 160m of debt accrued via a stadium and players you couldn’t afford had anything to do with it? I wonder if asking a youngster to come along to a rigged game facilitated by a secret agreement and a bent commission is in any way difficult? I wonder a lot of things…
TheLawMan2
June 5, 2018 at 15:03
What negative impact has the 5WA on all of the above?
========================================
That is an absolutely specious argument.
If something is wrong it is wrong.
A secret agreement between the games governing bodies and two clubs to decide what is acceptable to all of them re continuity, history, penalties etc with no-one else involved was simply wrong. How it has affected the other interested parties (the clubs and supporters) is not the issue.
Bearing in mind those concerned warned the others that it if the new club was not allowed into the top division it would destroy Scottish football and they said “Do it anyway, it’s the right thing to do”.
TheLawMan2June 5, 2018 at 15:03 (Edit)
Morally corrupt individuals who give not a single fuq how their decisions or indecision’s affect you or I. The 5 way Agreement is the root of all the current issues within the Scottish game and until this issue is resolved then I don’t see how it can ever truly move on and recover?
______________________________________________________________________________
Would like to understand how the 5WA affects you or i and how its the root of all current issues. The content of the 5WA clearly doesnt change anyones views on a singular issue so i cant see how it can be causing current issues.
Lets say they ripped it up or deemed it illegal, nobody on either side would change their views. It would still be the same debates ONLINE as the ones today.
I speak to lots of fans who have never even heard of the 5WA. Its only prominent on Social Media so really cant understand how it can resolve the “apparent” issues in Scottish Football.
Celtic have just completed a historic back to back treble, completed a historic run under Brendan Rodgers last season and got in CL proper again. Aberdeen have been challenging in last 2 seasons. Motherwell and Killi have been rejuvinated under current management. Hibs under Neil Lennon have had a cracking season. Hearts have opened up a new stand thanks to a huge investment from fans. Attendances in the last 2 seasons have been the highest for a long long while.
What negative impact has the 5WA on all of the above?
===============
What if it showed that prior to the LNS Commission that basically cleared RFC of cheating, part of the agreement was that titles would not be removed?
I am not saying it did, but there is certainly correspondence that could be read that way, but that is the suspicion and given
a) the Supreme Court Ruling that RFC used ebts in an unlawful manner that was not open to other clubs, a justification by LNS that ebts as RFC used them were open to other clubs that fell as soon as the SC ruled.
b) The DOS EBTS were lumped in with the BTC ebts and treated as lawful at the time when they weren’t
c) the SFA do not want to revisit
forgive supporters of other clubs smelling a big rat surname “Up” forename “Cover”.
Then there is the transfer of SFA Membership that could be argued contradicted the aim of Article 12 of UEFA FFP to protect sporting integrity.
Lots of issues that might benefit one way or another from the disinfectant of light.
My view is the 5 Way Agreement should be called the Frankenstein Agreement – it has created a monster.
PADDY MALARKEYJUNE 5, 2018 at 14:12
Re conflict of interest , shirley there must now be a register of all officials who are or have been a) members of masonic or other secret organisations
__________________________________________________________
TheLawMan
2June 5, 2018 at 14:53
Pretty sure that would break the GDPR laws.
==========================================
Really, which part of the regulations do you think it would breach.
THELAWMAN2JUNE 5, 2018 at 14:53 In what way ? If listing involvement it is a pre-requisite for the post , they don’t have to apply . I don’t see that as discriminatory .The authorities would have a lawful basis for processing the information , and that can include contractual obligations . So ,if you can point me to the part of the legislation that makes you “pretty sure” that it would break the GDPR laws , I would be obliged .
Auldheid on 5th June 2018 3:45 pm
Kings at it again
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/sport/rangers/16270588.Rangers_call_for_SFA_review_into_Gary_Hughes__39__appointment_and_Hampden_influence/?ref=twtrec
He must be worried about something
Is it not up to the JPDT to decide if the complaints are ridiculous? Is this another attempt by DK to undermine due process, one that all clubs voted for in 2011?
HOMUNCULUSJUNE 5, 2018 at 15:21
You are basically saying that DD is in a position to coerce MM to do things in his role in the SPFL because DD is a shareholder in a PLC that MM provides non executive director services to.
_________________________________________________________________
Just to be clear, when i say conflict of interest i am of course speaking of a “potential conflict of interest” I probably havent made that clear enough to be fair so apologies on my behalf.
The situation is a “potential conflict of interest” which is what triggers a disclosure.
GDPR Lawman’s suggestion seems to be that for one to allow ones’ own personal data to be held on a register is against the Data Protection regulations. SO his claim is that it is illegal to process data about oneself. I might be out of touch but that seems to me to be not what data protection is about.
On the other hand there might be a rule in secret societies that ones membership of that society should not be declared in a public register to avoid the potential taint of conflicts of interest. I do not know because secret societies keep secrets
I see that we are onto the cause of the financial crash ultimately this tracks back to ninja mortgages being converted into financial instruments which were thought to be more secure than the underpinning no income no job poor buggers at the bottom of the pile who were paying the interest. This was a disaster waiting to happen for years before it did. Nobody knew what they were doing and the teaching of economics as a mathematical science rather than what it really is was a daft thing. I did a lot of ranting about that long before the crisis
That seems to be a pattern with me ranting about stuff – I await gerontotranscendence with hope rather than anticipation.
On GDPR, the following are deemed to be prohibited for holding a register of information:
racial or ethnic origin;
political opinions;
religious or philosophical beliefs;
trade union membership;
I believe the Masonic movement is covered in the above as would the Knights of St Columba.
Lawman, you didn’t answer my question from yesterday. Are you suggesting that an unknown potential CoI (i.e. McLennan’s) is worse than an obvious potential CoI (i.e. any of the club affiliates in top positions at the SFA/SPFL, such as Lawwell, Ogilvie, Petrie, Smith etc)?
AuldheidJune 5, 2018 at 15:28
And i still take the word of company house over any agreement made by a group of men in blazers and badges.
TheLawMan2June 5, 2018 at 15:03
Morally corrupt individuals who give not a single fuq how their decisions or indecision’s affect you or I.The 5 way Agreement is the root of all the current issues within the Scottish game and until this issue is resolved then I don’t see how it can ever truly move on and recover?______________________________________________________________________________Would like to understand how the 5WA affects you or i and how its the root of all current issues. The content of the 5WA clearly doesnt change anyones views on a singular issue so i cant see how it can be causing current issues.Lets say they ripped it up or deemed it illegal, nobody on either side would change their views. It would still be the same debates ONLINE as the ones today.I speak to lots of fans who have never even heard of the 5WA. Its only prominent on Social Media so really cant understand how it can resolve the “apparent” issues in Scottish Football.Celtic have just completed a historic back to back treble, completed a historic run under Brendan Rodgers last season and got in CL proper again. Aberdeen have been challenging in last 2 seasons. Motherwell and Killi have been rejuvinated under current management. Hibs under Neil Lennon have had a cracking season. Hearts have opened up a new stand thanks to a huge investment from fans. Attendances in the last 2 seasons have been the highest for a long long while.What negative impact has the 5WA on all of the above?
_________________________
I agree with you, the 5 Way Agreement is not at the root of all current issues, it is just one more disgrace in the story of Rangers cheating, which is, itself, the root of all current issues. There again, the root might go even further back in time than that, to the moment Rangers adopted a sectarian policy and garnered their supremacist attitude that corrupted our game even before that cheating started.
If it is the case that those who do not follow Scottish football debate online do not know of the 5 Way Agreement, it just shows how disgraceful the SMSM is in allowing such a corrupt document to go unchallenged and unreported.
The improvements in the game at those clubs you mentioned were in no way assisted by the 5 Way Agreement, and it is always worth noting that the seeds of these improvements were planted during the absence from the top flight of any sort of ‘Rangers’.
There is a reason why the 5 Way Agreement was secret, and remains secret to this day, and it was not for the benefit of any other club than TRFC and the dead RFC. If any of the other signatories to the agreement have cause to fear what it holds, then that fear was borne of their actions in assisting one, or both, of those clubs in a way that was improper, and quite possibly illegal.
You may be right that ripping up the agreement, in itself, wouldn’t solve the ills of Scottish football, but if, in ripping it up, the result was that the consequences of Rangers liquidation were fully witnessed, then that would change a lot of attitudes and certainly make the game a lot more honest.
Always remember, without the 5 Way Agreement, TRFC would not be in the SPFL today.
THELAWMAN2
JUNE 5, 2018 at 14:49
So, essentially you’re saying all of this is irrelevant because Celtic aren’t deriving an unfair advantage. A few guys will get fired, and nothing will change because Rangers* have never been the victims of any institutional bias or corruption; quite the reverse, actually.
Celtic will continue to be forthright, sporting and playing by the rules and spirit of fair play. They have the biggest global support in Scotland and, EBT years excluded, have utterly dominated Scottish football for 50 years.
Celtic are fantastic ambassadors for Scottish football, and use their financial advantage over the other teams well – being canny and shrewd to a fault, within the rules. This isn’t lost on the rest of Scottish football, who rely on the self same principles. We all use our advantages within the rules, so we have that in common. It’s the basis for the fierce and intriguing competition in Scotland since Rangers died, and yes, the monopoly has to be challenged.
Oh for a Jim McLean or Alex Ferguson!
We can but dream.
So still no share offer from DK. It prompts me to write the following.
Apologies, just couldn’t help myself.
”whits the chairman daein Tam, whits he daein??!”
NAWLITEJUNE 5, 2018 at 16:10
Lawman, you didn’t answer my question from yesterday. Are you suggesting that an unknown potential CoI (i.e. McLennan’s) is worse than an obvious potential CoI (i.e. any of the club affiliates in top positions at the SFA/SPFL, such as Lawwell, Ogilvie, Petrie, Smith etc)?
____________________________________________________________________
Im saying a “non disclosure” of a “potential conflict of interest” is OBVIOUSLY worse than a clear potential COI such as Lawwell, Petrie etc yes.
The Scottish Fitba Association entered into a secret agreement with one/two member clubs. And there are people on here talking about disclosure of a “possible” conflict of interest, when this monstrosity has been created to facilitate the interests of one club, above the interests of other clubs.
Gie’s peace. !