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.
redlichtieJuly 25, 2018 at 12:09
Auldheid, from the BDO RFC 2012 Ltd Liquidation Report of 5 December 2017 :“As previously reported this was delayed by the submission of a claim by The Rangers FC GroupLimited (previously known as Wavetower Limited (“Wavetower”)), a company which is 100% owned by Worthington Group, and of which Craig Whyte was formerly a director. In this claim, in the initial sum of £18.3m, Wavetower asserted that it had a floating charge over the Company ’s assets. If valid, this claim would rank ahead of unsecured creditors. Following a lengthy exchange of correspondence, this claim was reduced, in June 2017, to £2.8m.”https://www.bdo.co.uk/getmedia/a4db008f-11e2-49fc-b72b-af5ba1ce8d2b/RFC-2012-Plc-report-dated-5-December-2017.pdf.aspxScottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
====================
Thanks. Now does anyone have any idea how the initial sum of £18.3m was arrived at and the basis of the reduction in the claim?
My not in any depth understanding was CW got £24m from Ticketus from which he was going to meet an number of liabilities he inherited according to the Takeover agreement he signed.
So £18m go to the bank to clear that debt which leaves £6M.
I think from memory Collyer Bristow ponied up £1m during Autumn of 2011 to keep the lights on so that leaves £5m.
The other undertakings were
(c) The Rangers FC Group has stated its intention to invest, or procure an investment of, £20 million by 2016 for investment in the playing squad. If, as part of any player acquisition, the Club agrees to make a transfer payment in a future year before 2016, The Rangers FC Group will be obliged to invest cash to cover such transfer payment, up to £5 million per year; such amounts coming out of the £20 million investment that The Rangers FC Group has stated its intention to invest;
(d) The Rangers FC Group has undertaken to provide or procure the provision of up to £5,000,000 of additional working capital facilities to the Club;(e) The Rangers FC Group is to contribute to the Club the amount required to meet a liability owed by the Club to HM Revenue & Customs in relation to a discounted option scheme tax;(f) The Rangers FC Group is to provide £1.7 million to the Club to fund capital expenditure in relation to improving kitchen and public address equipment at the stadium and meeting other necessary or reasonable capital expenditure required in the ordinary course;
Of that lot c) can be excluded as its an intention to invest.
We don’t know if any of the £5m at d) was provided or how much was.
We don’t know if the kitchen fix was paid for out of it but lets assume it had to be or no Hot Pies and Bovril which is an absolute no no.
That leaves £3.3m. Deduct £500K for the unknowns and we are left with the £2.8m that we know was never paid and was included in a Points of Claim put forward by Duff and Phelps in March 2012 (in which the wee tax case timeline was set out btw that Duff and Phelps (Paul Clark and David Whitehouse) forgot to tell Harper McLeod about in April 2012 when they asked for details of all ebts with side letters when instigating the LNS Commission – but I digress).
So summing up are Henderson & Jones acting on CWs behalf looking to get paid the £2.8m that is part of the £24m that Collyer Bristow insurers paid out to BDO that BDO put in the liquidation pot to share amongst creditors.
Presumably there is nothing HMRC can do to stop that dilution if H&J’s case that CW has supremacy because he (Wavetower then The Rangers Group) held the floating charge?
Am I getting warm anybody? (and Who were Collyer Bristows insurers?)
I’ve now located a reference to the total paid to Lloyds, £18,453,263.72, made up of the loan of £16m and the “gift” of £2,453,263.72 in another document I have access to, but don’t want to say any more at this point as it is relevant to the live case.
However, Lord Bannatyne did make a reference in yesterdays proceedings that, while the settlement terms remained privileged, the “pleadings” made in the BDO v Collyer Bristow case were already available to H&J as they were public documents. I spoke to JC at the time and wondered how the public can get access to such “public documents”.
I’m unsure if the document I have access to forms part of those “pleadings”, but to be on the safe side I will keep the main body of its contents to myself for the time being.
A totally off the wall memory flash Auldheid. Did Ticketus not extend the price of the tickets (a minimum of the 18.5m that was required to repay Lloyd’s) plus VAT to Whyte?
Some problems with the site today folks. Over the next couple of days, we will sort it all out. Perhaps a new look too.
Auldheid July 25, 2018 at 13:18
Thanks. Now does anyone have any idea how the initial sum of £18.3m was arrived at and the basis of the reduction in the claim?
======================
It’s quite a simple explanation. The floating charge came with the assignation of RFC’s debt from Lloyds to Wavetower (TRFCG), so the value of the assets covered by the charge was the £18m+ amount paid to Lloyds.
As I stated in my earlier post, the offsetting of the £16m, which was accepted by everyone as the amount of the loan advanced by RFC to Wavetower, left a balance of £2m+ as the value of the Floating charge and thus the reduced H&J claim.
I don’t know the basis of H&J decision to revert to a claim for the original £18m, but it could simply be them sticking with the value of the assigned loan from Lloyds. If I’m right then H&J might be intending to force BDO to make a case for the repayment of the (unsecured?) £16M loan from Wavetower. That could could prove problematic as Wavetower is already insolvent.
There is a fair bit of information about the Ticketus advances and repayments in the earliest D&P Creditors report. Note that RFC actually made a couple of payments for a total of £8m (albeit that they took out another advance in order to make the 2nd payment)
Duff & Phelps Creditors Report 05/04/12
£20,300,000 – Amount advanced – May 11
£25,400,000 – Revenue expected in return
£3,000,000 – RFC paid Ticketus – June 2011
£5,000,000 – Amount advanced – September 2011
£9,300,000 – Revenue expected in return
£5,000,000 – RFC paid Ticketus – September 2011
£26,700,000 – Ticketus Creditors Claim April 2012
Duff & Phelps CVA Proposal 29/05/12
£26,711,857 – Creditors Claim – May 2012
BDO Creditors Report 14/05/14
£27,211,672 – Creditors Claim – May 2014
Re : EJ/JC – Court Reporting
Further to your comments re Mulholland’s article in the Record on yesterday’s proceedings in court (at which he wasn’t present) – he also has an article in to-day’s Times (page 21) Scottish edition titled “Law firm is told to explain Rangers settlement secrecy” .
I take it he is being paid by The Record & The Times for submitting comment on court proceedings at which he didn’t attend – you guys (EJ&JC) are missing a trick here – you could be augmenting your incomes by selling your reports to the press with the added selling point – you actually were in attendance during the court proceedings !
I thought there was something wrong.
Never mind Celtic won 3-1
Who gave me that thumbs down?!
It was you slimjim wasn’t it?
Arbroath4Ross CountyRoss County1FTGroup BForfarForfar Athletic3MontroseMontrose1FTGroup DBrechinBrechin City1DunfermlineDunfermline7FTPeterheadPeterhead0DundeeDundee2FT
Whats happening? Get back on here everyone.
This is lonely
Well if you wont join in.
There once was a guy during the French Revolution. He thought he had lost his sweetheart. Took an overdose.
This is what happened!
March to the Scaffold.
Be warned!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmdDfRnUkKI&list=RDTmdDfRnUkKI&start_radio=1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmdDfRnUkKI&list=RDTmdDfRnUkKI&start_radio=1
oops sorry
JIMBO 22.01
Not guilty Jimbo.
Wasn’t even aware of the score until 5 minutes ago.
Jimbo,After your team’s performance tonight I’m surprised you have played such a downbeat piece. Here’s something more uplifting and celebratory, “Ode to Joy”.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jo_-KoBiBG0
Ballyargus, I think there is something wrong with site just now. Few of us can get on.
I love this one. For obvious reasons.
Every time you hear it you can only think of one stadium.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Qqd6T_A9LY
AuldheidJuly 25, 2018 at 13:18
‘.. (and Who were Collyer Bristows insurers?)’
__________________________
Ha ha, Auldheid!
That sent me on a very entertaining search engine journey!
I assumed that you knew and that there might be some particular significance in the answer!
In relation to the actual question, though, all I could discover was that CB , in allegedly dire straits and in danger of going bust (for reasons unconnected with the ‘saga’) at one point were suing their insurance broker ( ‘Lockton commercial something or other’-I didn’t make a note) who , presumably arranged their insurance, because their Insurer was not coughing up £50 million or so!
What a mucky little world that is: insurance, re-insurance, brokers, con-men sales staff, front-loaded commissions, very, very small print, sharkish lawyers, ready to demonstrate how, in point of law, you’ve no case, and, tough titty, you’ve paid your premiums but in this particular case, you’re not covered!
I don’t suppose anything has changed since Charles Dickens’ time!
I suppose I should be more responsible tonight. Well done to the jambos, 0-0 at half time and won 5-0. Now just get the grass cut!
Alan Stubbs, lucky man.
The Jags won too!
Killie won but Kris Boyd was missing. Imagine comparing him to Larsson! Henrik would have scored two hat tricks in that game.
Auldheid called me out on CQN today, and I wasn’t even posting! (I’m Jim The Tim over there).
I forgive you auld fella.
HomunculusJuly 25, 2018 at 12:50
‘…“DK has no tax adviser but is happy there is no problem from his point of view in closing the Ben Nevis company. His intention is just to present a blind alley to any revenue investigation.”‘
________________
I think that these were the words of people operating in that world of ‘international finance’ who privately among themselves thought the man was mad, but who would happily accommodate him and take his money in fees, while making sure that they themselves would never be found guilty of breaking any law!
They are even worse human beings than yer man!
easyJamboJuly 25, 2018 at 13:30
‘..the “pleadings” made in the BDO v Collyer Bristow case were already available to H&J as they were public documents.’
_________________
I’ve tried BAILII every which way, and haven’t found anything relevant! It must be there somewhere in the English court proceedings: if indeed it was in the public domain!
Perhaps Lord Bannatyne is mistaken? Or, more likely, I simply fail as a researcher!
A very worrying article. The SFA’s typical slow moving approach simply won’t cut it here, the new CEO has a lot of work to do but this is unquestionably the most important thing for him to get right.
It’s in dealing with issues like this that I worry a guy with Maxwell with such an underwhelming CV may be out of his depth, I hope to be proven wrong.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/16377773.scottish-footballs-child-abuse-investigation-finds-policies-are-not-fit-for-purpose/
NickJuly 26, 2018 at 09:24
‘..It’s in dealing with issues like this that I worry a guy with Maxwell with such an underwhelming CV may be out of his depth.’
____________________
It has to be unthinkable that the governance body of a sport , even though in sporting matters already mired in deceit and lies, will not seek expert guidance and advice on how to protect our football-playing children and grandchildren,and provide such resources as are necessary to do so.
They were ready enough to create the Big Lie in the interests of ‘money’: surely to God they will not take risks by putting monetary considerations before the protection of children!
JOHN CLARKJULY 26, 2018 at 11:07
One would certainly hope they are indeed seeking that expert guidance and creating new safeguarding structures as we speak John. They should have been speaking to the people at The Offside Trust and the English FA (who seem to have responded to this crisis in a much more robust manner) as part of the review.
Not sure what happens elsewhere but for general youth football, coaches and officials should all be PVG checked and all clubs require a Child Protection Officer who should be identified to players, parents/guardians so they have a contact if needed.
There is a requirement that one person should not hold all the positions in a club/team so that there are at least two adults involved coaching admin etc.
Everyone involved in clubs should have recently completed the Children’s Well-being in Scottish Football e-learning online module.
On a practical side of things I can’t see what more can be done in terms of the checking and education side.
The issue is trying to enforce bans and the likes for people/teams/clubs who are not doing what is required by their relevant governing body.
The problem is however that it already takes time, effort and money to run leagues/cups and teams and many folk trying to get kids playing football may be put off or not have the time or inclination to comply with all or increased the diktats and as such leagues / teams could fold.
Clearly there have been issues in the past which no-one wants repeated but at the same time we need to be encouraging more people to help with youth football, so a balance needs to be struck between being able to weed out the ‘bad uns’ and keep the existing ‘good uns’ and more like them involved.
I listened to Chris McLaughlin on radio shortbread this morning. He stressed the costs involved in doing child protection properly!!!! And how poor Scottish football is
it’s been a while since I was involved in disclosures however my recollection is that
it is illegal to operate any group dealing with vulnerable groups without a PVG cert. tropical the governing body with the Scottish govt will fund disclosure checks for volunteers.
So what’s the problem? I’m afraid it means all teams without the right pvg and other infrastructure – like a disclosure coordinator must stop immediately. No ifs no buts
that it can still be allowed that unchecked adults are involved in any form of youth football is scandalous
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-44963451?ns_campaign=bbc_sportsound&ns_source=twitter&ns_linkname=scotland&ns_mchannel=social
As an update I note that the SFA have now made a public apology to the victims of abuse in the Scottish game. Greg Clarke at the English FA did this back in 2016 so this is pretty overdue but it would be churlish not to welcome it.
As the SFA seem to be accepting some failings here I’d like to see them set up a compensation fund for victims.
https://twitter.com/Moravcik67_/status/1022116659845365760
For those on twitter this is an excellent thread explaining what Scottish teams would need to do to meaningfully improve the co-efficient and secure easier draws.
The short version is that they need to do a hell of a lot and it’s going to take a few years.
DOM16JULY 26, 2018 at 12:51
And that’s where the money needs to be spent, in the enforcement.
However it is not just the more serious issue of potential sexual abuse and the likes, some of the time it is just about trying to let the boys play football in a relaxed and enjoyable manner.
Previously before moving to 11 a sides at U13 teams played seven a side.
This past season after winter the SYFA allowed teams to play nine a side if they wanted / had the numbers to help he kids adapt to a bigger pitch etc etc.. This is then followed by a transitional tournament phase where the teams are introduced to 11 a sides.
As opposed to playing by the rules and letting players develop at a reasonable pace, the odd wannabe Jose Mourinhos out there were, despite warning that they were not to do so and weren’t insured, organising eleven a side games , presumably with the aim of getting a step on the opposition for the new season. (Even in the lower leagues where it is generally the case players are not showing the kind of talent that will see them turning pro).
There really are some zoomers out there running some teams.
WOTTPIJULY 26, 2018 at 13:23
When the kids in this country progress from 7 aside to 11 aside ,they go from playing silky skilled football to the more agricultural version of the game almost overnight .The smaller skillful kids get sidelined ,the bigger ones who can hoof the ball up the pitch and steam roller the smaller ones thrive ,with predictable results .Teams fold, kids get disillusioned and drift away from the game .Its carnage .
France Belgium England and most other European countries woke up to this problem years ago and did something about it .They play 7 aside until 12 ,9 aside between 12 and 14 before moving onto 11 aside in 3rd year .I asked an official in South Lanarkshire sport and leisure why we didn’t play 9 aside at that age group .His answer -basically they couldn’t be arsed remarking the pitches and anyway the “coaches “would be against it cause it would spoil their fun .
Its basically a mirror image of the senior game in this country lots of passion and misdirected energy -,no vision,no direction lots of wasted talent .
The “final” Rangers Retail Ltd accounts to 20 June 2017 are new viewable on the Companies House website.
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08142409/filing-history
Looks like TRFC has got itself a final windfall dividend of 51% of £1,135,000, being the break up value of the company, which is no longer trading.
WOTTPI
I vehemently disagree with your idea of balance regarding child protection.
One child abused is one too many.
If a club setup does not take this seriously then they should be banned until they do.
The bad uns you talk about are a sleekit psychotic bunch of manipulative perverts.
I certainly wouldn’t let any child of mine near a club which didn’t have child protection as their number one priority.
I am spending some time at the moment on an enjoyable read of the judgment to be found at this link
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2012/1427.html
I’ve just reached a bit where the judge quotes from a letter from Mr Clark ( of D&P) in support of his desire that the matters in issue should be dealt with expeditiously:
“This date is sought in the light of the commencement of the 2012/13 SPL season on the weekend of 4 August 2012. As set out above the SPL might expel the Club from the competition if it cannot be satisfied that the Club can complete its fixtures for the new season. I have commented above on the effect expulsion from the SPL would have on the value of the Club.”
Mr. Clark also said:
“Once the SPL fixtures are complete [that is to say the fixtures in the current season], the Club’s trading revenue will drop sharply due to the cessation of gate receipts. The Club will, however, require funds to cover overheads in this period. The Fund, if found to be the property of the club, could sustain the costs base through the summer period. Alternatively, it could provide working capital for any new owners’ purposes or capital for a distribution to creditors in a CVA.”
In the event, of course, there was no need to expel RFC plc because there was neither a new owner nor a CVA.
Instead, Liquidation supervened and snuffed out the very life of the football club (not any ‘holding company’) that the four lads of Glasgow Green founded:
And neither the TRFC Ltd Board, nor the RIFC plc Board , nor the SPFL, nor the SFA, nor UEFA ,nor FIFA, nor all the liars in the SMSM and in the BBC can alter that absolute fact.
Oh dear .
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44972946
Ian Maxwell taking pelters on Radio Scotland just now.
PADDY MALARKEY
JULY 26, 2018 at 18:18
Oh dear.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44972946
==============================
Well, if there was anybody left in Scotland who had any lingering doubts about the SFA’s incompetence – and organisational cowardice – they must know by now?
The SFA is a blight on Scottish football.
StevieBCJuly 26, 2018 at 19:27 (Edit)
What I heard on radio was that SFA wasn’t fit for purpose, which is something that the Government simply cannot ignore.
The pressure for reform mounts and if other evidence of unfitness for purpose could be added to the discussion perhaps at last the Government will have to change its hands off policy, for the good of the game and the good of the country.
jimboJuly 25, 2018 at 23:49 (Edit)
I suppose I should be more responsible tonight. Well done to the jambos, 0-0 at half time and won 5-0. Now just get the grass cut! Alan Stubbs, lucky man.The Jags won too!Killie won but Kris Boyd was missing. Imagine comparing him to Larsson! Henrik would have scored two hat tricks in that game.Auldheid called me out on CQN today, and I wasn’t even posting! (I’m Jim The Tim over there).I forgive you auld fella.
=============
What are the sanctions for leaving out the definite article? Its not as if its Rangers FC or The Rangers FC is it? 🙂
AULDHEIDJULY 26, 2018 at 19:39
What I heard on radio was that SFA wasn’t fit for purpose, which is something that the Government simply cannot ignore.The pressure for reform mounts and if other evidence of unfitness for purpose could be added to the discussion perhaps at last the Government will have to change its hands off policy, for the good of the game and the good of the country.
=======================
If the SFA do not have sufficient protection for young people then that simply has to change, and the Government must apply any pressure necessary to ensure it happens.
However, I do not see the Government ever bringing any pressure on the SFA to change in terms of football governance. After all, they are as signed onto the idea of ‘Rangers’ being the most important club in the country as the SFA are. They will never to anything to jeopardise that, even if every rule in the book is bent or broken to protect ‘Rangers’. They proved that beyond all reasonable doubt in 2012.
AULDHEIDJULY 25, 2018 at 13:18
22
0 Rate This
redlichtieJuly 25, 2018 at 12:09Auldheid, from the BDO RFC 2012 Ltd Liquidation Report of 5 December 2017 :“As previously reported this was delayed by the submission of a claim by The Rangers FC GroupLimited (previously known as Wavetower Limited (“Wavetower”)), a company which is 100% owned by Worthington Group, and of which Craig Whyte was formerly a director. In this claim, in the initial sum of £18.3m, Wavetower asserted that it had a floating charge over the Company ’s assets.===========================================================
Auldheid you have to get yourself up to speed on scottish football ,are you sure about that piece
if wavetower was the company with which CW bought ragers 1872 and bar a few changes are now in court making a claim of a floating charge over the assets of ragers 1872
Who on earth are the company that is being liquidated ,if it’s not wavetower and it’s not ragers 1872 inc ,who the flippin flip is it.
Also what assets did this unknown company have that CW would take a floating charge over .
I can’t believe I had never heard of this company ever before
whatatangledwebweweave rsc
FAN OF FOOTBALLJULY 26, 2018 at 21:00
…….Who on earth are the company that is being liquidated ,if it’s not wavetower and it’s not ragers 1872 inc ,who the flippin flip is it.Also what assets did this unknown company have that CW would take a floating charge over .
I can’t believe I had never heard of this company ever before
——————————————–
Maybe it’s Sevco 1872 Ltd? Why not? Apparently you can give an off the shelf company a fancy football sounding name and the spineless SFA and gullible fans accept it in a heartbeat….
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
Scottish Football should be proud tonight. Time to get behind the coefficient!
Spe Expectamus
Well done to all the Scottish teams in Europe this week. Some very heartening performances there, particularly Aberdeen (if only they could have hung on 10 more minutes).
FINNMCCOOLJULY 26, 2018 at 17:04
I get what you say but believe you are misinterpreting my concerns.
You can have all the high handed safe guards in place but some bad uns will get through regardless.
In the meantime, make the process too onerous, decent parent volunteers, who probably make up 99.9% of the folks running and coaching teams, will simply say they can’t be arsed with the hassle.
Therefore, as opposed to having a wider body of parents involved who are monitoring each others behaviour and having different pairs of eyes to look over the kids, the determined abuser will be the one left running the team, mostly on their own, under the guise of being a ‘good un’ who just wants the boys to play football.
Its that environment that suits them down to the ground.
Either that or teams will simply fold and its all back to the XBox for the next generation.
Child protection can still be a clubs No 1 priority through the ethos and standards it holds without an overly heavy handed top down system that discourages well intentioned volunteers from getting involved in youth football.
So sad and so close for Aberdeen tonight.
Tom English mentioned some figures about the financial disparity between the club last season, it was over £100m.
Best of luck in the away leg.
To come from 2 down to a 3-2 victory is remarkable for Hibs.
0-1 Away from home in Europe is always a good result for TRFC.
As mentioned above not a bad night for the old coefficients.
Does anyone know if the kit TRFC played in tonight is UEFA approved under Article 50? I don’t think the red shirts have had a previous outing.
WOTTPI
Thanks for the response.
I think we agree on how manipulative and cunning these asbtards can be. I think we all know that where there are children, you will find these monsters lurking around pretending to be charming and wanting the best for your children. Of course this is not just a football problem. It happens anywhere.
But I disagree with your scenario whereby parents or coaches would be put off by the introduction of strict and rigorous standards, policies and procedures.
Would this not attract more people to a well run club?
Would this not deter perverts?
In industry a well run company has policies and procedures which are continuously audited, not only to ensure compliance, but to exceed standards which become the benchmark for the future. Continuous improvement, if you like.
If I drop my child off at a football club I want to know that they will be safe. More importantly, I want to know how that club will ensure that safety and what they are doing to monitor it and improve it. I want to know who the people are that run the club. I want to see their CV’s, qualifications and especially those regarding child education and well being. In short. I want the best. Wouldn’t you?
I understand your point that some may make it through the net. They are, after all, cunning and devious. But everything that can be done should be done to make that net smaller and smaller.
If clubs cannot offer that, do you not think that they deserve to go to the wall?
I’m not dropping the dog off at the kennels for two weeks whilst I go somewhere for my holidays.
My children are the most precious people in the world to me.
TRFC Played a European tie last night in a training top that was not in any of the colours that were supposedly registered for this season. These tops had no sponsorship details on them. Maybe due to Croatian law but the youth team tops worn when they played Manchester United earlier were also bereft of any sponsors details. Has the shirt sponsorship deal been removed by Bet32? Is there more trouble surrounding sponsorship than we realised?
JIMBOJULY 26, 2018 at 23:10
0-1 Away from home in Europe is always a good result for TRFC.
—————-
It is their best result away from home in europe.
CARFINS FINESTJULY 27, 2018 at 06:35
TRFC Played a European tie last night in a training top that was not in any of the colours that were supposedly registered for this season. These tops had no sponsorship details on them. Maybe due to Croatian law but the youth team tops worn when they played Manchester United earlier were also bereft of any sponsors details. Has the shirt sponsorship deal been removed by Bet32? Is there more trouble surrounding sponsorship than we realised?
=======================
I was of the understanding strips had to be registered with the SFA who passed details onto UEFA. It may be a minor issue but have Rangers been allowed to ignore a rule and do as they please by the SFA yet again?
CARFINS FINESTJULY 27, 2018 at 06:35
Has the shirt sponsorship deal been removed by Bet32? Is there more trouble surrounding sponsorship than we realised?
—————-
I read they never had a Pennant to exchange with the other team,may just be a simple oversight as this club from ibrox have not had many games in europe,so may not have been on a list of priorities
What a fantastic week for Scottish football with all of our teams doing us proud in Europe.
There’s a lot of work to do with our co-efficient but Celtic were fantastic on Wednesday & look good to get to the groups for me, Hibs were excellent at times last night & will beat them in the 2nd leg no bother (McGinn was superb btw, it’s now 10 million!), Aberdeen shut up the tourist league fanboys and Rangers winning away from home in Croatia is an impressive achievement in itself.
Importantly all these individual results generate national co-efficient points so even if Aberdeen go out to Burnley next week they will have still contributed with their draw.
Well done to all involved, here’s hoping for 4 wins next week.
CLUSTER ONEJULY 27, 2018 at 07:17
I read they never had a Pennant to exchange with the other team,may just be a simple oversight as this club from ibrox have not had many games in europe,so may not have been on a list of priorities
Good to see the big issues being tackled on here. Rumour has it that Josh Windass had his shirt untucked as well…
CLUSTER ONEJULY 27, 2018 at 07:17
TRFC Shirt colours that were supposedly registered for the use of in both domestic and European matches were: 1.Blue. 2.White and 3.Orange. Nowhere was a Red top mentioned.
Re : Aiden Earley
From Tallboy Poppy on twitter – AE is to launch a private prosecution of Wm Stevenson over the acquisition of the Charlotte Fakes information – think that one through to its possible revelations re that material & who (allegedly) owns it now .
NICK JULY 27, 2018 at 08:41
LOLd. Just one thing…
fixed that for yah… ;o)
Nick, as you point out pennants and red shirts are not big issues in themselves and taken in isolation. Would you not agree that they might be symptomatic of a deeper malaise?
EX LUDOJULY 27, 2018 at 09:11
Nick, as you point out pennants and red shirts are not big issues in themselves and taken in isolation. Would you not agree that they might be symptomatic of a deeper malaise?
Okay I’ll indulge you…go on?
http://www.aidanearley.org/news/
I don’t think I’d read Mr Earley’s blog before, it’s quite something. If I was a betting man I’d suggest Mr Stevenson aka Charlotte Fakes doesn’t have too much to worry about.
Earley seems like an angry man with a lot of issues, the 17th July 2018 blog in particular is bizarre, almost John James like in it’s paranoia.
FINNMCCOOLJULY 27, 2018 at 00:48
Totally agree with what you say about needing to know about who is running teams etc
However the reality is, in my experience, most parents do not ask for CVs etc.
I once got strange looks when I asked for more details of staff in a nursery, where I was placing my own most precious possession in the world, as if this was some weird request.
So even in that circumstance I don’t think most folks aren’t too bothered.
Some people probably are more worried about their dogs and cats.
Yes a well run club attracts players but that does not necessarily transfer into masses of parent volunteers, which is my point.
At our age group we have two full squads and a waiting list but if my child stops playing tomorrow and I say that’s me had enough I can’t see anybody else in the parent group stepping up to take up the slack to help my fellow coach for the team I help run.
What will happen then is the team will either struggle on or fold and the parents will simply spread their kids out to other clubs in the hope of getting a game and where someone else is doing the work. And again they probably won’t be checking anyone’s details.
Re: the red kit, local laws in Croatia prevented Everton from wearing jerseys with a betting company’s logo for their away tie against Hajduk Split last season. http://fcbusiness.co.uk/news/everton-partner-donates-shirt-sponsorship-to-community-foundation/
Nick, your indulgence is appreciated. Perhaps I am being too circumspect in discussing the apparent lack of shirt sponsor and shirt supplier that Rangers are experiencing just now. None of this was deemed worthy of comment by our esteemed media but for me at least it indicates that a valuable income stream has evaporated (albeit temporarily one would hope)
NickJuly 27, 2018 at 08:41
CLUSTER ONEJULY 27, 2018 at 07:17I read they never had a Pennant to exchange with the other team,may just be a simple oversight as this club from ibrox have not had many games in europe,so may not have been on a list of priorities
Good to see the big issues being tackled on here. Rumour has it that Josh Windass had his shirt untucked as well…
________________
Are you auditioning for Level5?
I’m pretty sure the strange kit TRFC wore last night is something they will be keen to ensure is overlooked by the media and downplayed online. Downplayed as in the mocking of any mention of it.
For those of a bean-counting persuasion, Ranger Retail to year end 20th June, 17 now published:
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08142409/filing-history
£2.2m t/o seems to be fairly small but this would have been during the SD boycott era.
Company no longer in operation as of 20th June, 17 – presumably when Glib chased the snakes out of Ibrox(!)….so you would assume that the retail side of things is now reflected in TRFC/RIFC accounts.
If only he had been more careful in discharging his fiduciary duties then they wouldnt be in the mess they now find themselves in re-strip sales…..ironic considering he is pursuing an action against Charles Green for that very same reason!
In Court this morning, for ” Petition 115/17; Note: RFC 2012 plc for orders under para 75.”
Before Lord Doherty.
Scarcely ten minutes.
The Noter updated the court as to where they all were with the masses of documents.
They have 39 boxes from police Scotland, some of these overlap with other documents which will be scanned using the computer search terms to identify relevant stuff. There will be a cost that and decisions have to be made about who should pay.
The Crown Office continues to provide documents in dribs and drabs, and the Respondents hold some documents.
Although things are progressing slowly, he said,and there is more co-operation since the Respondents have a new Agent, it is perhaps time to ask that a time-limit be put on further searching.
I would ask your Lordship to grant a period of 28 days , which hopefully might not be needed, within which this searching should be brought to an end.
Mr Patterson, for the Respondent, stating that he was new to the case, had no difficulty with this, on the understanding that if more time is needed, a motion can be enrolled at the time.
And Lord Doherty directed accordingly.
2 gentlemen of the Press, eJ and I were present.
ALLYJAMBOJULY 27, 2018 at 10:13
Are you auditioning for Level5?
I’m pretty sure the strange kit TRFC wore last night is something they will be keen to ensure is overlooked by the media and downplayed online.
Is this a wind up that’s went completely over my head? I thought Ex Ludo was having a laugh, is there genuinely some sort of conspiracy theory going round that the ban on gambling adverts reason given is untrue?
By all means don’t let me downplay it if so and I’m sure someone will get to the bottom of it but I do think we sometimes damage the credibility of the website by getting caught up in inane conspiracy theory stuff about pennants etc (as fun as it is).
I notice a couple of tweets have already went viral on twitter screenshotting posters from here’s tweets and are causing much hilarity amongst fans of all clubs on there.
EX LUDOJULY 27, 2018 at 10:06
Nick, your indulgence is appreciated. Perhaps I am being too circumspect in discussing the apparent lack of shirt sponsor and shirt supplier that Rangers are experiencing just now. None of this was deemed worthy of comment by our esteemed media but for me at least it indicates that a valuable income stream has evaporated (albeit temporarily one would hope)
Gambling ads aren’t permitted in Croatia which was the reason for the different top, this has been widely covered in the media and on social media.
Of course Kindred Group could have simultaneously pulled the plug on their Rangers’ sponsorship and the Croatia gambling thing could be a Level 5 ruse…
The missing gambler logo may be something to do with the law in Croatia. But I agree with Nick, it is probably a storm in a tea-cup.
I would be more worried as to why, (a week before the season starts), Sevco didn’t just order a set of either of the other three kits, with the logo removed. Especially with an opening game v Aberdeen….
Who happen to wear red taps !
Surely there wont be a 5th new tap unavailable?
NICKJULY 27, 2018 at 11:16
EX LUDOJULY 27, 2018 at 10:06
Nick if your club had anything like a normal relationship with their kit provider they would have contacted them and asked for a fresh strip in the registered colours with the advertising removed. It would appear that they do not given that they had to turn out in their training kit.
BORDERMAN67JULY 27, 2018 at 11:42
1
2 Rate This
NICKJULY 27, 2018 at 11:16EX LUDOJULY 27, 2018 at 10:06Nick if your club had anything like a normal relationship with their kit provider they would have contacted them and asked for a fresh strip in the registered colours with the advertising removed. It would appear that they do not given that they had to turn out in their training kit.
No issue with my club’s kit provider or strip, in fact I’d go as far to say it’s a cracker which if I were 30 years younger I’d have been wearing last night to watch that stunning second half performance. 😉
Don’t make assumptions, not everyone who holds a slightly differing view from you is a Big Bad Sevcovian!!
I’m bemused about the angst being expressed about protection to children and other vulnerable groups. This isn’t new and there are well established guidelines on this
this is a big doc but sets out the frameworks etc
https://www.children1st.org.uk/media/4799/10_steps_to_safeguard_children_in_sport_2013.pdf
So so why can’t Scottish football enact these guidelines?
Good day to all fellow SFM posters (particular mention to Jimbo!), hope you are all well! After a months self imposed ban on all social media and forums I return! (where I am sure you are all glad to hear from me
)
I’ve not really been paying to much attention to club level football during mid June-mid July. My focus was taken up 100% with what I would class as the best major football tournament of my lifetime. Coinciding with the glorious weather, it was a month of beer gardens and watching some wonderful football. For once the best team of the tournament actually won it! The defensive, dull football playing teams were eliminated early on, and Croatia who I always have a soft spot for made the final – and what a final it was! Even the England team this year all seemed humble and down to earth, so much so that I almost didn’t mind seeing them go far this year (almost!). 2 weeks later and I’m still suffering withdrawal symptoms.
At the national level it would appear (albeit I may have missed a bunch!) that there is a bit of a feel good factor again with our clubs in Europe. Starting with Celtic on Tuesday night, I thought they played fantastically well against a very good European side. Not seen much of Celtic apart from Old Firm games in the last 5-10 years, but dare I say Eduardo looks like he could be the best player in Scotland since Larson? He will surely be the number 7 for a good many years to come, unless he goes for silly money down south. For a team that has not strengthened, the whole side looked so much stronger from last season. Sinclair seems to have found his form, and the World Cup seems to have done wonders for Gambano (sp?).
Elsewhere Aberdeen were very close to pulling of a memerous win against a very good English side. I think they may be able to take a win down in Burnley which would surely be huge in the “SPFL is the equivellant of our conference leagues” argument. Hibs also pulled off a good win.
Now if I take aside the problems around my club (well actually King and the problems he brings upon himself and the club!!), there is a bit of genuine optimism around our support at the moment, and not the usual SMSM nonsense that is spouted before a ball is kicked. In McGregor we finally have a very good goal keeper again. Both our new centre halfs and the left back look a huge step up from last season, and I think Arfield is our best bit of business we’ve done in years. The first three games we have looked organised and no longer leaking silly goals. Under any of our previous management regimes, I believe we would have lost the game last night. As it was we saw our first away win in Europe in 10 years, and the first time the opposition haven’t scored at home in Europe since 2000! I’m not getting carried away, and I think the next round would be a stage to far. I also don’t believe we have anything like the squad to compete for the SPFL against a Celtic who are starting to look every bit as good as the MON team of yesteryear. But we are young, we don’t have silly, past it, massively paid ‘marquee signings’ (Alves, Barton, Krankjar) nor have we squandered millions on foreign players untested in the UK. A new board and chairman and I’d be a happy bear.
So anyway, apologies for the long waffling post. Just wanted to wish everyone well on here, and to say congratulations to all Scottish teams in Europe this last few weeks. For once we are not embarrassing ourselves!
WOTTPI
Sadly, I have to agree with you regarding parents not being bothered to check where they are dropping off their children.
Perhaps people are just too trusting or perhaps just plain stupid.
Maybe I have watched too many episodes of the X-files…”Trust No One”
Rangers have had a bid knocked back for Hearts striker Kyle Lafferty.
Record Sport understands the Ibrox side made a £200,000 bid on Friday morning for the forward but it was quickly rejected by the Jambos.
——————————————–
As I understand it, it was £130,000 was up front…the rest when TRFC win the league. (Seriously)
HS
FINNMCCOOLJULY 27, 2018 at 13:18
Its a hard one, with no right answers.