Two wrongs and a right

Avatar ByBig Pink

Two wrongs and a right

The John James blog has of late thrown up many hooks to hang our theories on and provided much food for thought on the Rangers issue.

His casual invective against individuals, particularly Dave King, and often members of the Bench is not particularly SFM-like in its approach, but despite the industrial nature of much of the discourse, the value of his work cannot be denied.

On the subject of revisiting LNS, I find myself in agreement with his conclusions. His argument about Celtic’s attitude to Resolution 12 is to my mind compelling insofar as it serves as a barometer for Celtic’s disposition towards rocking the SPL/SFA boat. Like him, I cannot see any real evidence, (despite the recent statement by the club) that they are disposed to move in the direction of a revisited LNS (although it should be noted that besides Celtic there are another 40 clubs who may have an opinion on this).

His conclusions though should not be confused with his opinion on the rights and wrongs of LNS. Like most of us, he appears to be of the opinion that LNS was seriously flawed on multiple counts.

I saw Bill McMurdo’s remarks too in reference to the same topic. He alleges that the whole SFA house of cards would come down if information he has at his fingertips, information that off-book payments in Scottish football was much more widespread that the RFC EBTs, was made public.

UnderTableIf what he says is true, and he has evidence, he should be expanding on the innuendo.

If he chooses not to, then he is as complicit as those he accuses.

In any event, to say that no action should be taken because others have done it is not the same as saying that no action WILL be taken.

If he means the former, then he is wrong. By the logic of that argument it follows that burglars for example should not be prosecuted because other people burgle houses but didn’t get caught.

I suspect he knows himself that by any objective standard, this view is in error, because when he is called out on it, he reverts to ad hominem attacks on those who called him on it. No defence, just withering, dismissive sarcasm – in the manner of former pundit Jim Traynor when he refers to those who speak of sporting integrity.

If he means the latter, then he should do what he can do prevent it and make his information public. I believe he knows that the £3 note fraternity runs through Scottish football like lettering on a stick of seaside rock, but I suspect he doesn’t actually have evidence.

If there is evidence, then McMurdo is in a unique position to get it out in the open and make life difficult for those he alleges are corrupt.

Then we should go back in time as far as possible to investigate those who participated in “black money” schemes, whether they are EBTs, other forms of tax dodge, or just money in a brown paper bag.

I do not believe that any of us participating in the Scottish Football Monitor would fear exposure of any of our clubs. I think we all know that this is far more important than club loyalties.

If McMurdo’s information is correct, then we also have the opportunity to show that the clamour for revisiting LNS is not an anti-Rangers with-hunt. Instead of reconvening LNS, let’s have Bill’s info, and constitute a wider enquiry. If the info was made public, and it will now be difficult for him to put his genie back into the bottle, could the SFA and the clubs resist the pressure for such an enquiry?

handsMaybe McMurdo’s intervention/revelation may yet be seen as a seminal moment in the campaign to rid ourselves of corruption and incompetence in football.

Our position has always been clear. Corruption is counter to sporting integrity. Therefore it must be rooted out.

John James and Merlin are probably correct in that the clubs will seek to thwart any move for a new enquiry; and there could easily have been a deal done with King last week.

However there was also a deal done with Charles Green about the new club being parachuted into the SPL. How did that one turn out?

About the author

Avatar

Big Pink administrator

Big Pink is John Cole; a former schoolteacher based in the West of Scotland, He is also a print and broadcast journalist who is engaged in the running of SFM . Former gigs include Newstalk 106, the Celtic View, and Channel67. A Celtic fan, he is also the voice of our podcast initiative.

1,703 Comments so far

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on10:35 pm - Jan 9, 2016


Carfins Finest 9th January 2016 at 9:17 pm
=============================

Yes, an arrestment can be served on a third party who holds assets belonging to the subject of the arrestment.

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on10:47 pm - Jan 9, 2016


Carfins Finest 9th January 2016 at 9:17 pm
‘…but would it be possible that the account arrested is that of the SPFL to prevent payments due to TRFC being paid…’
_______
Have a read at the advice booklet at http://www.gov.scot/Resource/Doc/236156/0064724.pdf at page 24 ‘other arrestments’
As Homunculus said a little earlier, it looks like they can arrest any monies due to you no matter who holds them!

View Comment

4424me

4424mePosted on10:52 pm - Jan 9, 2016


If the debtor has had to go to another’s bank account for an arrestment does that mean the bank account of the holding company of the team playing out if Ibrox did not contain sufficient funds to cover the arrestment amount 

View Comment

Avatar

FisianiPosted on11:18 pm - Jan 9, 2016


Arresstment of funds only happens when there is a significant risk that those funds will soon disappear. A company that has no source of credit can choose how to spend the final few pounds. Arrestment takes away this choice. If this is true then we are in the final weeks.

View Comment

Avatar

jimboPosted on11:31 pm - Jan 9, 2016


Management.

One of the first things about management and leadership, I think, is about getting the staff on your side.  Not in a modern fancy, hip American sort of way but in a purely Scottish sort of way.  Speaking the truth, no bullshitting.  Then very good delegation, giving people responsibility which brings it’s own satisfaction.  Praise in public, reprimand in private.    Every time I moved about within a few weeks it was easy to identify the trouble makers within a workforce, not trade union folk I hasten to add, I have always been a trade unionist myself and a member of the Labour Party.   But the shirkers, malcontents, people who were keeping decent folk out of a job.   I used to take them on.  Isolate them.  You could almost hear the rest of the staff cheering you on.  They were feared.  I faced them down.  Most were sacked because that type of behaviour doesn’t come alone.  Many were thieves.  Most of the time I got tip offs from the staff.  They wanted rid of them as much as I did.

Because most people want the same things.  To work for a successful company, security of employment, a good wage, job satisfaction, recognition and pride in your job no matter the status.  I used to be as equally at ease having my tea breaks with the cleaners – and listening to their concerns – as with the Managing Director at a posh hotel.

From there we move on to customer satisfaction.

From my experience if the staff are in the right frame of mind, taking care of the customers becomes second nature and all things being equal you should have success.   I am of course talking about front line services so thing like corporate strategy, marketing etc. are outwith my remit.   But it’s in the front line that companies are identified.

Which brings me to the SFA & SPFL.

How can these people feel comfortable in their own skins?   Have they any idea of leadership, management?  For all I know they may be good first line managers to some people who get a modest (<5k) expense account and get awfully excited at being in the same room as Gordon Strachan and Nicola Sturgeon (no disrespect).  “Oh Stewart Regan said good morning to me this morning (sigh!)”  That’s all and good.

These Apollos of the beautiful game in Scotland never ever deign to bow their heads downwards and listen to their customers.   Every bampot on the internet reckon they live in a ‘bunker’.  Not just that, they are not forthright, they are conspiraritorial  liars, cheats, and everything I mentioned above what might make good management, THEY ARE NOT. 
They are afraid.  ‘Fearties’ to face people down. Spineless.  

One day, our time will come.  When they will be exposed, I hope it is sooner than later.  Although for my own gratification, I would love to see their disgrace revealed to everyone on the television in my lifetime.

View Comment

Avatar

Carfins FinestPosted on11:35 pm - Jan 9, 2016


Homunculus 9th January 2016 at 10:35 pm #
Carfins Finest 9th January 2016 at 9:17 pm =============================
Yes, an arrestment can be served on a third party who holds assets belonging to the subject of the arrestment.
———————————
John Clark 9th January 2016 at 10:47 pm #
Carfins Finest 9th January 2016 at 9:17 pm ‘…but would it be possible that the account arrested is that of the SPFL to prevent payments due to TRFC being paid…’ _______ Have a read at the advice booklet at http://www.gov.scot/Resource/Doc/236156/0064724.pdf at page 24 ‘other arrestments’ As Homunculus said a little earlier, it looks like they can arrest any monies due to you no matter who holds them!
————–
Thank you very much guys. As an afterthought I have been advised that this has been carried out at the request of HMRC. Again though, no guarantee my source of information is 100% true. Usual caveats apply. Thanks again.

View Comment

Avatar

jimmciPosted on12:14 am - Jan 10, 2016


Re Chris McLaughlin ban rumour from Grandmother Suck.
The previous ban on BBC staff by Rangers was, in some respects, a shrewd move.
First reason was nobody really realised there was a ban such was the continuing coverage of Rangers in whatever competition they played, even the fabled Pertofac trophy, with ever more fawning and compliant coverage.Secondly, wIth Messrs MacLean, Lamont, Ferguson (d) and occasionally (b), Young, Wilson, MacIntyre, Spiers on freelancing duties, they are guaranteed to SELL quite a few additional seats such is their enthusiasm not to miss one of their pet teams’ games. As they say, every penny counts.
So if Chris McLaughlin is indeed banned for daring to report facts will anyone be even the wiser? The quislings in BBC Scotland Sport will continue, as ever, to follow, follow, and produce their usual output.

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on3:59 am - Jan 10, 2016


Re: Phil’s latest interesting report on the TRFC / RF discussions which supposedly didn’t happen…

True blue bear or not – if I was discussing providing a ‘fans loan’ to a company controlled by King – via conference call – I would absolutely record the conversation.
Discreetly of course.
Just in case there was any confusion later.

Based on a SA judge’s recommendations, it would be the sensible thing to do when dealing with King.
You would think…?

View Comment

Famous song

Famous songPosted on7:56 am - Jan 10, 2016


Things you didn’t know: from Douglas Alexander in today’s Sunday Times. “…. a three-year ban from UEFA competition was one of the consequences of liquidation.”

View Comment

yourhavingalaugh

yourhavingalaughPosted on8:15 am - Jan 10, 2016


Famous song
Whats the point of the ban if you have been liquidated,is it if someone does eventually pays all the creditors ,even years later,say 10 or so ,the ban then kicks in.

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on9:36 am - Jan 10, 2016


No  I understand its to stop effective pheonixing efforts who get to a euro qualification spot within thee years of hitting restart (ctrl+ alt+Del for you young uns).

Its what I understood the position to be in that Derry City article posted recently.    

View Comment

Avatar

Big PinkPosted on10:16 am - Jan 10, 2016


The Record/Mail is really off the rails. Headline today

John Collins: Celtic don’t get credit without Rangers.. we NEED them back in the top flight

Trouble is, he DID NOT SAY THAT. Plenty of quotes in the article, but nothing that makes any reference to a need for Rangers to be in the top tier; or anything about not getting credit for wins when Rangers are absent – even in answer to the sort of closed, leading questions I have heard these guys ask so they can shoehorn a quote into a headline they have already written.  

Made up nonsense to fit in with the SMS narrative.

I guess the headline is designed to convince Celtic fans that they need Rangers to validate themselves.

Presumably they don’t give enough of a toss about the obvious self-loathing and desperately low self-esteem amongst other teams in Scottish football (you know the kind we witnessed yesterday at Tynecastle) to poll other assistant managers 🙂

You have to question why they feel the need to continue to do this. It certainly isn’t because they think that the public are ‘on-message’ is it?

View Comment

yourhavingalaugh

yourhavingalaughPosted on10:49 am - Jan 10, 2016


If I was John Collins I would be onto my lawyer,being made to look like a bumbling incompetent ,haud oan a minute.

View Comment

Avatar

tamjartmarquezPosted on11:10 am - Jan 10, 2016


Foolishly went to DR site, and noticed Mcinnes raging, accuses Hearts of cheating headline, beside said photo of Mcinnes, er raging. 
havent watched post match interviews again, but i thought he was quiet magnanimous at end, once dust had settled. 
hard fought, fast and furious cup-tie under lights, fever pitch atmosphere, where the outcome was in the balance right to the final whistle.
however the SMS narrative is always talk down the fact that Scottish fitba on TV can be exciting and doesnt have to feature the usual suspects every week.

View Comment

wildwood

wildwoodPosted on11:12 am - Jan 10, 2016


I’m not convinced that Celtic and or John Collins are THAT naive. If so it’s an absolute red neck that they’ve been unsuspecting victims in a SMSM stitch up so many times, Its actually beyond a joke now.
Celtic reps will get it more than the others. But all clubs should have a common policy for when the ‘journalst’s’ questions wander towards Sevco. How difficult is it to say “we’re not here to talk about that”?
Yet again – another depressing example of how the non cheating clubs have failed to maximise to their benefit the situation where the game has been blue franchise free and allowed the media to continually portray a game in crisis both as a competitition an financially without a Govan club.

View Comment

Avatar

bfbpuzzledPosted on11:19 am - Jan 10, 2016


These loan for equity later deals are nebulous beasts made even more so by the lack of public listing and market making. How are the new shares valued? Are these valued at the last public sale price so or without dilution by the issuance of the new shares? Is there a valuation formula or declared number of shares at an agreed price in the loans document? Is the equity to be valued by independent parties at items of issue? Is the equity to be valued by the company underpinned by the righteous dignity of the RRM doing the valuation in fraternal trust from those  being given the equity?
Pauchle Pauchle all is Pauchle as was nearly said in a Carry on film “Carry on on the Gardey Loo” an every day tale of a Govan Sludge Ship taking refined gathered from a large City for disposal at sea.

View Comment

Avatar

Jingso.JimsiePosted on11:30 am - Jan 10, 2016


jimbo 9th January 2016 at 11:31 pm

…They are afraid. ‘Fearties’ to face people down. Spineless…
=======================================

They are indeed. As such, they’re not fit for purpose.

They’ve been in post since 2009/2010.

But…it’s the clubs who can remove them & they haven’t.
=====================
Big Pink 10th January 2016 at 10:16 am #The Record/Mail is really off the rails. Headline today
 
John Collins: Celtic don’t get credit without Rangers.. we NEED them back in the top flight
================================

It’s bad enough to make you think that Level Sinko are submitting content, with byline already appended…

 131321211111

 

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on11:38 am - Jan 10, 2016


Big Pink 10th January 2016 at 10:16 am
‘..You have to question why they feel the need to continue to do this. It certainly isn’t because they think that the public are ‘on-message’ is it?’
_________
It certainly is not. It  is clear that there is something deeper than a mere desire to try to boost circulation in the underlying the utterly malicious and uni-directional distortion of truth that that newspaper’s untrustworthy, biased-in-the-extreme, editorial staff and football hacks are so regularly guilty of.
There is a special place in our hearts for such people, the place where we store our memories of their exemplars, such as  Goebbels .
Happily for us, as circulations continue to fall, so those liars will begin to swell the ranks of the unemployed.
And very bad cess to them.
They had an opportunity to investigate the truth, ascertain the facts, report the facts, insist on the appropriate action being taken by the Football Authorities, and then try to help a new club earn its proper place in the scheme of things by honest sporting effort.
Instead they did what they did, and continue even more desperately now, to do what they are doing.
They shame themselves, and they shame their ‘profession’.

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on11:54 am - Jan 10, 2016


Further to my post of 11.38 am, I’m just listening to a female journalist,Alex Crawford,on ‘Desert Island Discs’ ( which, I think , is hosted by the brother of our Keef), describing her horrendous experiences while reporting on what was happening in one of the troubled Islamic countries: held prisoner in a mosque, tanks, guns, helpless to help the people she saw being gunned down etc etc.
Such as Alex  are entitled to claim to be a journalist, unlike a,seholes  like those responsible for the headline in question .

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on12:09 pm - Jan 10, 2016


John Clark 10th January 2016 at 11:54 am #
‘Desert Island Discs’ ( which, I think , is hosted by the brother of our Keef)

Brother? That’s a bit harsh John 02

View Comment

Avatar

AwaynRaffleYerBunnetPosted on12:35 pm - Jan 10, 2016


Getting back the arrestment, I may be wrong as it’s many years since I did my Banking Exams, but I’m sure an arrestment is only valid at the time of serving  I. E. the money must be in the named account at the point the arrestment is served? 
Interested to see this developing story….

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on12:35 pm - Jan 10, 2016


scottc 10th January 2016 at 12:09 pm
‘…Brother? That’s a bit harsh John’
______
Ha, ha! Key finger moving faster than the brain!
Sorry about that-Kirsty Young is one of my favourite people and I don’t hold her in any way accountable for her  brother ( or step-brother) , our Keef. (I just wish he would emulate her research work and effort to be factually accurate and her general competence at what she does)

View Comment

Avatar

TheClumpanyPosted on1:01 pm - Jan 10, 2016


Good Afternoon.
Very amused by this puff piece from the Record web site today
Rangers boss Mark Warburton: My boys are ready and capable for European football
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-boss-mark-warburton-boys-7150455
The Record doesn’t ask if Sevco have the finances to a) play next season; b) meet UEFA requirements to enter their competitions. Minor details, I’m sure…

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on1:11 pm - Jan 10, 2016


bfbpuzzled 10th January 2016 at 11:19 am
=============================

I have thought about this, from what I can see it seems to be the intention to issue new shares once they can pass the special resolution to dis-apply pre-emption rights.

If that is the case the shares will be offered to those and such as those, presumably including the RF (if the loan is taken up). I do not imagine they will over price them if that’s the case. So RF would probably get a decent deal.

Just out of interest, if there was to be a rights issue with normal pre-emption rules applying and the shares were priced at 25p then RF would get 2,000,000 for their £500,000. As that is less than they currently hold then they could take up the full amount.

View Comment

Avatar

sixlargebeersPosted on1:18 pm - Jan 10, 2016


Bunnet – your recollection is sound. Even though my spell as a trainee lawyer in the court department was many moons ago, I do recall that funds needed to be in the account in question when the arrestment was lodged.
In theory you might need to go back several times to arrest on a day when there happened to be funds in the account, although I assume the debtor would wise up after learning of the first arrestment and do what they could to ensure that funds were, em, diverted elsewhere.

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on1:31 pm - Jan 10, 2016


TheClumpany 10th January 2016 at 1:01 pm
==============================

“If we play like we can, dominate the football and take our chances – we can compete with any team.”

I think it’s fair to say that any team which dominates the football and takes their chances can compete with any team.

View Comment

Avatar

nawlitePosted on1:44 pm - Jan 10, 2016


Sixlargebeers, been quite a few years since I dealt with arrestments received at a bank branch but as far as I’m aware there’s no requirement on the bank to let the arrestee know of a failed arrestment i.e. one received when the account has no funds, so I  don’t think they can take evasive action. Happy to be corrected, though.

View Comment

Avatar

bfbpuzzledPosted on2:26 pm - Jan 10, 2016


Homunculus
pricing the shares at 25p as repayment of a loan when their market value might be 1p is what I am alluding to. Part of the issue is that without listing on an exchange the actual value is not difficult to determine. One might look at earnings ratios of similar businesses but since there are no earnings and never have been that would produce a nil value. Looking at underlying assets would also be difficult since the value to a purchaser of these is potentially very small and that is without reference to the ownership issues. With the ownership issues the values would be further dressed.
As I have said before the ownership shares merely gives the right to part of a loss of £10 million per annum.

These are donations to a cause wig a thank you letter in the form of a shares certificate unless there is a wholesale coulter all change the signs of which are invisible to me and concealed beneath the carapace of hate.

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on2:43 pm - Jan 10, 2016


bfbpuzzled 10th January 2016 at 2:26 pm
============================

Indeed, I don’t think anyone would argue with any of that.

To be honest I think the biggest danger would be under pricing the shares rather than the opposite.

If King et al want to take more control of the business, whilst paying as little as possible then the ideal method would be a rights issue to preferred individuals, with the price of the shares as low as possible.

I don’t think the likes of Mike Ashley would just sit back and allow that to happen though.

I just use the 25p figure as it roughly what they traded at prior to losing the listing if I remember correctly. It also raises about £10m pounds if the full 40m are sold at that price.

View Comment

tykebhoy

tykebhoyPosted on4:16 pm - Jan 10, 2016


Just a thought have sky shot their goldenchild in the foot by allowing the bbc to show what was on paper the tie of the round being the clubs occupying 2nd and 3rd spots in the league.  I watched the game at Tynie last night on the “cooncil telly” and I think it probably matched it’s on paper billing.  Meanwhile Sky show a 2nd tier team host a mid table 3rd tier team.

I’ve seen estimates suggesting 20,000 were in Govan, although from the couple of minutes I watched I think that may be optimistic.  Would the walk up have been much bigger had the match not been televised and is that loss in revenue matched by the tv money?  Sky also chose Celtic at Stranraer which looks to be a capacity crown and was probably more likely to have an upset given Ambrose in defence and a goalkeeping debut.  Had Sky paired this with the Hearts v Dons  then I suspect the BBC may have chosen something other than the Ibrox match.

View Comment

Avatar

nawlitePosted on4:23 pm - Jan 10, 2016


From the BBC online report on the Stranraer-Celtic game. I bow down before the quality of the pundits we have to put up with!
BBC Radio Scotland pundit Derek Ferguson At Stair Park Posted at 16.14
“It is going to be tough for Stranraer from now on. They need a spark from somewhere. They have had chances to test Celtic and not done it, but I don’t think it is for the lack of quality. I just think it is down to levels of ability.”

WHIT?

View Comment

Avatar

Big PinkPosted on5:34 pm - Jan 10, 2016


Nawlite

Every day is a Ƨkool day 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

sixlargebeersPosted on5:57 pm - Jan 10, 2016


Nawlite,  I have no reason to doubt what you say.  

View Comment

Cluster One

Cluster OnePosted on6:05 pm - Jan 10, 2016


Every day is, a Ƨkool day 🙂

BDO on twitter10
@bdoaccountant

View Comment

The Cat NR1

The Cat NR1Posted on7:31 pm - Jan 10, 2016


tykebhoy 10th January 2016 at 4:16 pm #Just a thought have sky shot their goldenchild in the foot by allowing the bbc to show what was on paper the tie of the round being the clubs occupying 2nd and 3rd spots in the league.  I watched the game at Tynie last night on the “cooncil telly” and I think it probably matched it’s on paper billing.  Meanwhile Sky show a 2nd tier team host a mid table 3rd tier team.
I’ve seen estimates suggesting 20,000 were in Govan, although from the couple of minutes I watched I think that may be optimistic.  Would the walk up have been much bigger had the match not been televised and is that loss in revenue matched by the tv money?  Sky also chose Celtic at Stranraer which looks to be a capacity crown and was probably more likely to have an upset given Ambrose in defence and a goalkeeping debut.  Had Sky paired this with the Hearts v Dons  then I suspect the BBC may have chosen something other than the Ibrox match.
=========================
I thought that BBC Scotland had first dibs on live Scottish Cup coverage?

Mark Warburton would surely be  shocked at the lack of maximum respect shown to the cup holders, and I would have thought that Stirling Albion v Inverness Caley Thistle was of far more interest to the neutral than Sevco Scotland at home to Cowdenbeath. Having said that, it doesn’t fit into Sky’s paid up membership of the liquidation survival cult, and there was a classic example in the commentary of the Stranraer v Celtic game as Ian Crocker managed to shoehorn a reference to “The Old Firm” into his narrative.

View Comment

The Cat NR1

The Cat NR1Posted on7:49 pm - Jan 10, 2016


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/35271770
“Tom English: Rangers recruitment, Dundee Utd struggles”
Another Tom English cracker.
“It can not all be about youth, though. If it is indeed the Premiership for them next season then you’re reminded of King’s view that they must light some kind of fire under Celtic’s rear-end right from the get-go. They would not have to take the champions all that close to the wire, but they would want to be competitive for second.
Losing to Celtic would be palatable as long as they were not bested by Aberdeen, Hearts, St Johnstone, Ross County and Inverness into the bargain. It’s not in the DNA of Rangers fans to stoically accept such a state of affairs.”
.
The reference to the Brentford player further down is hilarious, and deja vu from Scott Allan in the last transfer window.

View Comment

Avatar

armchairsupporterPosted on10:26 pm - Jan 10, 2016


I seem to have missed something. JJ is reporting the £5m SD loan repaid. 

There can be little doubt that the £5m has finally been repaid to Sports Direct. I have consistently taken the view that this money would be raised from an investment bank. John Bennett, Barry Scott and George Taylor have a

Having scoured posts here, looked at Phil, the Clumpany and FOG I can find no one else who shares this certainty. JJ offers no evidence that payment has been made nor does he say how he has come to that conclusion. Nevertheless, JJ’s post is otherwise suitably critical of happenings down Ibrox way.

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on12:49 am - Jan 11, 2016


The Cat NR1 10th January 2016 at 7:49 pm
‘… you’re reminded of King’s view that they must light some kind of fire under Celtic’s rear-end right from the get-go…’
_______
“The gombeen man is not worth the shilling he readily takes for his soul.” ( old saw)
Let him stick to Rugby.

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on6:05 am - Jan 11, 2016


armchairsupporter 10th January 2016 at 10:26 pm #I seem to have missed something. JJ is reporting the £5m SD loan repaid. 
There can be little doubt that the £5m has finally been repaid to Sports Direct. I have consistently taken the view that this money would be raised from an investment bank. John Bennett, Barry Scott and George Taylor have aHaving scoured posts here, looked at Phil, the Clumpany and FOG I can find no one else who shares this certainty. JJ offers no evidence that payment has been made nor does he say how he has come to that conclusion. Nevertheless, JJ’s post is otherwise suitably critical of happenings down Ibrox way.

He will undoubtedly be basing his comment on the ’email’ that PZJ reportedly received from the Land Registry stating that they were in the process of removing the charges from the various properties. In it he claims that the records will be updated today or tomorrow. 

View Comment

Avatar

HighlanderPosted on8:07 am - Jan 11, 2016


The Cat NR1 10th January 2016 at 7:49 pm #
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/35271770

“……Aconcagua, the world’s second largest mountain in Mendoza, Argentina.”

In his report on the current trials and tribulations of Dundee United, Tom English likens their struggles to climbing some of the world’s highest mountains, such as Kilimanjaro, Aconcagua and Everest. Unfortunately for English, he didn’t check his basic facts before proclaiming Aconcagua as the world’s 2nd highest mountain. Impressive as it is in its own right as the highest mountain outside Asia, Aconcagua doesn’t even make the top 100 of the world’s highest peaks. So what, you might think, what does that have to do with Scottish football?

Well, nothing directly, but it illustrates the point that if one of our top journalists can’t be bothered to check his basic facts, there’s little chance of him accurately reporting the death of Rangers FC following years of cheating, assisted by a set of corrupt football authorities!  

View Comment

Avatar

Big PinkPosted on8:10 am - Jan 11, 2016


Scottc

I was assured by one of our Rangers supporting posters that despite having no time for the Land Grab Guy, his information was correct.

Was reluctant to post as I could not corroborate – and I am sure it’s not the full story, however on the face of it, it seems that the security has been removed from Edmiston House and the Albion.

View Comment

neepheid

neepheidPosted on9:50 am - Jan 11, 2016


Assuming that Ashley has now been repaid, a few questions arise. 
If the securities have been released by Ashley, have they been reassigned to the new lenders? I would certainly expect so, and it will be very interesting to see the names on any new securities lodged at the Land Registry.
Did Ashley accept King’s conditions for repayment, or did he tell him to get lost, at which point King backed down and paid up? I would be very surprised if Ashley has accepted any conditions imposed by King, such as dropping his litigation against the SFA, but we’ll find out soon enough.
Which leaves the most puzzling question of all- why make repayment now? Cash is clearly very tight, there are strong rumours of a schedule of arrestment having been lodged with the SPFL’s bank, yet priority is given to paying off Ashley? Is the repayment the precursor to an insolvency event? Or was Ashley in a position to demand repayment, and of course, prepared to go to court if he didn’t get it?
If the answer is a pre-pack administration, then it will happen very soon, since external creditors appear to be knocking at the door. And if administration isn’t the plan, and it’s business as usual, then as usual more money is desperately needed. At least they will now have the possibility of offering security to any new lender, which could cover the backs of the fan groups, if they can swallow King’s minor ambiguities1414 over matching any fan funding. 

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on9:58 am - Jan 11, 2016


scottc 11th January 2016 at 6:05 am
=======================

Am I not right in saying that Land Registry covers England and Wales, Scotland is covered by The Registers of Scotland (or some such).

Two entirely different Departments, albeit they perform similar roles.

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on10:05 am - Jan 11, 2016


Does anyone else get the feeling that they are watching a big game of musical chairs and the question is, who will be holding the assets (including the IP) when the music stops playing.

View Comment

neepheid

neepheidPosted on10:21 am - Jan 11, 2016


Homunculus 11th January 2016 at 9:58 am #scottc 11th January 2016 at 6:05 am=======================
Am I not right in saying that Land Registry covers England and Wales, Scotland is covered by The Registers of Scotland (or some such).
Two entirely different Departments, albeit they perform similar roles.
=================
Registetrs of Scotland is a sort of umbrella department which manages all Scottish registers. The register for land is officially the Land Register, although it is commonly referred to as the Land Registry. The Land Register replaced the Register of Sassines in the early 80’s. 

View Comment

woodstein

woodsteinPosted on10:53 am - Jan 11, 2016


As at 10:56am today.

View Comment

Corrupt official

Corrupt officialPosted on11:02 am - Jan 11, 2016


yourhavingalaugh 10th January 2016 at 8:15 am #Famous songWhats the point of the ban if you have been liquidated,is it if someone does eventually pays all the creditors ,even years later,say 10 or so ,the ban then kicks in.  
   ————————————————————————————-
   YHAL, There was no ban, well not since Barcelona at any rate. The consequence of liquidation was that they ceased to exist. The SMSM couldn’t come up with any suitable mental gymnastics to explain this to the poor wee souls, so decided to lie instead. calling it a ban. Sevco are not eligible for Europe because they do not meet the entrance requirements.  
    If the war-chest padlock is introduced to the thermal lance tomorrow, and all the creditors paid in full by Sevco, With a wee drink on top………….Sevco would still be “Banned”  
   I’m afraid calling it a ban is what happens when SMSM-isms are allowed to creep into common parlance. 

View Comment

tony

tonyPosted on11:20 am - Jan 11, 2016


Corrupt official
lol,the quickest ban ever for a new club just starting out

View Comment

yourhavingalaugh

yourhavingalaughPosted on12:41 pm - Jan 11, 2016


Corrupt
Thanks I thought so,these idiots have off the radar stupidity which is beyond belief,there families must be glad to see their backs when they go out the door in the morning and dread their return at the end of the day,some mothers do have them,I pity the day when they will be out of a job and their families have to listen to their babbling all day,it will come,shortly.

View Comment

Avatar

goosygoosyPosted on1:14 pm - Jan 11, 2016


Scottish Cup Draw 5th round
Rangers  v  East Kilbride or Lothian City Hutchison Vale

….remaining ties will be drawn live on Sky Sports tonight

View Comment

yourhavingalaugh

yourhavingalaughPosted on1:41 pm - Jan 11, 2016


Breaking News
Lothian.City Hutchinson Vale The 2nd have just signed 11 English Premiership players on short term loans,Warbo of the Magic hat says this shouldn’t be allowed as it gives an unfair advantage .

View Comment

Avatar

goosygoosyPosted on1:44 pm - Jan 11, 2016


Big Pink 11th January 2016 at 8:10 am #Scottc
I was assured by one of our Rangers supporting posters that despite having no time for the Land Grab Guy, his information was correct.
Was reluctant to post as I could not corroborate – and I am sure it’s not the full story, however on the face of it, it seems that the security has been removed from Edmiston House and the Albion.
 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
I`ll believe it when its on Phil`s Blog

View Comment

Avatar

alzipratuPosted on1:45 pm - Jan 11, 2016


I posted along similar lines on Friday however it is worth reiterating that there is no way on God’s earth that the email published by stateaidboy is genuine.

For the avoidance of doubt, I am not stating that the loan has not been repaid or that securities are not being returned.

However to base a case on that email is just nonsense. Sevco is a company limited by shares which are “freely” tradable albeit they are suspended from any and all stock exchanges. The information contained within that email would constitute commercially-sensitive information which could affect share value. It is laughable in extreme that a civil servant would simply release that information prior to its publication to anyone, let alone that fool.

It. Would. Not. Happen. Period.

Oh, and his timescale is p*sh too.

View Comment

zerotolerance1903

zerotolerance1903Posted on3:17 pm - Jan 11, 2016


Been having a break from the Omnishambles over the last couple of weeks but catching up today. 

alzipratu 8th January 2016 at 5:36 pm #Regarding state-aid boy’s claims: if anyone believes that a crown agency would release sensitive, commercial information in advance of its publication, they should go see a shrink.

Totally agree.  The short text that he has copied (or invented) is also so grammatically weak that I cannot believe it to be an official communication. 

View Comment

tony

tonyPosted on4:29 pm - Jan 11, 2016


CELTIC Football Club today announced that it has identified three individuals connected with the use of pyrotechnics during the Club’s match against Stranraer yesterday (Sunday).
These individuals will be suspended indefinitely from attending Celtic matches and the Club’s investigations will continue.  
Yesterday’s events have again caused embarrassment to Celtic and our supporters. On numerous occasions Celtic has stated its strong opposition to the use of pyrotechnics but regrettably again, a very small number of individuals, within a ticket allocation of 2,500, have damaged the Club.
We should be very clear. Those responsible simply do not care about our Club, our reputation or the safety of our fans and we do not want them at our matches. The Club will be reviewing its ticket allocation procedures to ensure that this matter is addressed.  
Ensuring the safety of our supporters and staff is always of paramount importance to Celtic Football Club. If such behaviour was to continue, the reality is it would only be a matter of time before serious injury is caused. However, we will not allow safety to be compromised by the actions of a tiny minority.
We have been inundated again by our supporters following yesterday’s events and those fans can rest assured that this issue will be dealt with in the strongest terms. We cannot and will not allow this minority to destroy the magnificent reputation which our fans have earned over many years.
We would like to take this opportunity to thank all our supporters who travelled to Stranraer and positively supported the team. Your support is greatly appreciated.

View Comment

neepheid

neepheidPosted on4:38 pm - Jan 11, 2016


https://examplewordpresscom7073.wordpress.com/2016/01/11/sports-direct-securities-discharged-over-rangers-assets/

The latest from our “State Aid” enthusiast regarding the Sports Direct loan. He has posted an image of what he claims is an application to the Land Register to discharge the security over Murray Park. There is no indication of who made the application.
I will remain unconvinced until the security is actually shown as discharged at the Land Register, or Sports Direct confirm that the loan has been repaid and the securities cancelled. Call me an old cynic, but by now nothing would surprise me with this lot.

View Comment

Avatar

redlichtiePosted on5:05 pm - Jan 11, 2016


Neepheid,

Who would usually make such an application – RIFC/TRFC or SD? If RIFC/TRFC then are they trying to show that SD/MA are the bad guys if/when they then block the transfer?

Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.

View Comment

Prohibby

ProhibbyPosted on5:09 pm - Jan 11, 2016


tony 11th January 2016 at 4:29 pm #
Daft and irresponsible behaviour but hardly malicious, I would say.  It will be interesting to see how the SFA’s response stack’s up against the SPFL’s in the matter of sectarian singing at a recent Easter Road match.  What’s the likelihood of a ‘let’s call it even’ outcome, I wonder?

View Comment

tony

tonyPosted on5:12 pm - Jan 11, 2016


Prohibby
sevco sectarian singing already forgot about,nothing will be done on that score

View Comment

neepheid

neepheidPosted on5:12 pm - Jan 11, 2016


redlichtie 11th January 2016 at 5:05 pm #Neepheid,
Who would usually make such an application – RIFC/TRFC or SD? If RIFC/TRFC then are they trying to show that SD/MA are the bad guys if/when they then block the transfer?
=================
Sorry, Redlichtie, I just don’t know. Maybe someone else on here knows?

View Comment

Avatar

redlichtiePosted on5:19 pm - Jan 11, 2016


I have this image of a cheque for £5M paperclipped to a letter on MA’s desk with the word “No” written against each of the conditions RIFC want to apply to the repayment….

An intriguing saga to say the least. MA’s next move?

Scottish Football needs even temperature balls tonight.

View Comment

zerotolerance1903

zerotolerance1903Posted on5:20 pm - Jan 11, 2016


neepheid 11th January 2016 at 4:38 pm #https://examplewordpresscom7073.wordpress.com/2016/01/11/sports-direct-securities-discharged-over-rangers-assets/
The latest from our “State Aid” enthusiast regarding the Sports Direct loan. He has posted an image of what he claims is an application to the Land Register to discharge the security over Murray Park. There is no indication of who made the application.I will remain unconvinced until the security is actually shown as discharged at the Land Register, or Sports Direct confirm that the loan has been repaid and the securities cancelled. Call me an old cynic, but by now nothing would surprise me with this lot.

1. He has posted an image of an application and claimed it as “proof of discharge”. 

2. It clearly states “Until completed, applications to register deeds are subject to rejection or withdrawal.”

3. There are no applicant or granter details on the application.  

It it may genuinely be the case that an application was made to release the security on Friday, that is far from proof that it has been accepted.  

View Comment

Avatar

bfbpuzzledPosted on6:25 pm - Jan 11, 2016


The discharge application appears to be back to front but it might refer to the discharge by SD in favour of trfc  rather than the initial security by trfc in favour of SD…. That apart from the scissor lines where there has been cutting and pasting…

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on7:09 pm - Jan 11, 2016


To be perfectly honest I don’t think the security over Murray Park is that important. Particularly given that The Scottish Sports Council has one as well which will presumably be staying in place.

Neither is the one over Edmiston House really. From what I know it is a pretty much derelict office block in Govan. Hardly a hugely valuable asset (from a lay man’s perspective).

To me the ownership and control of the intellectual property is what really matters.

I’m not sure if User mckker will be happy about their search record being posted on the internet. Unless of course he or she is the person who actually posted it. It might have been a good idea to redact that bit.

View Comment

jean7brodie

jean7brodiePosted on7:32 pm - Jan 11, 2016


bfbpuzzled 11th January 2016 at 6:25 pm #
_______________________________________
PMSL. Scissor lines….12

View Comment

Avatar

alzipratuPosted on8:52 pm - Jan 11, 2016


Correct me if I am wrong, but I’ve tried to obtain a copy of the discharge notice referred to by stateaidboy yet I am being told it’ll take two days to be emailed to me. So how did he get a copy when he claimed it was received by RoS on Friday and would not be updated to the records until Monday?

Can anyone else access it?

View Comment

Avatar

alzipratuPosted on9:03 pm - Jan 11, 2016


Can I recommend that anyone with an interest in sevconian charges and securities has a wee look at http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk? Stick SC425159 into the search field and click on the charges tab.

View Comment

tony

tonyPosted on9:10 pm - Jan 11, 2016


alzipratu
came back zero results mate

View Comment

Homunculus

HomunculusPosted on9:11 pm - Jan 11, 2016


This might be easier alzipratu

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/SC425159/charges

View Comment

ianagain

ianagainPosted on9:43 pm - Jan 11, 2016


Ali
Yes very interesting.
So many caveats in the SD ones.
Doubt the “all cleared” up storyline.
Also true the 2 to 3 days wait for regisresponses.. Perhaps he took a punt and applied on Wednesday?

View Comment

Avatar

sixlargebeersPosted on9:44 pm - Jan 11, 2016


The Discharge would need to be signed by SD and delivered to RIFC/TRFC’s lawyers who would then submit it to the Land Register for registration.  SD would only deliver the signed Discharge in exchange for the sum required.  What appears to have been posted is a copy of the application record relating to the Title Sheet (basically a copy of the land register entry) for Auchenhowie. On the face of it, the security is gone, provided the Land Register don’t subsequently reject it due to some error. That’s unlikely since Discharges are very straightforward documents – difficult to get them wrong.

View Comment

Avatar

armchairsupporterPosted on9:46 pm - Jan 11, 2016


scottc 11th January 2016 at 6:05 am #

He will undoubtedly be basing his comment on the ’email’ that PZJ reportedly received from the Land Registry stating that they were in the process of removing the charges from the various properties. In it he claims that the records will be updated today or tomorrow. 

Thanks for the clarification scottc and others. Looks like Ashley may be conceding ground. A number of possible reasons spring to mind.

1. He is happy to wash his hands of the club, watch it go to the wall and pursue key individuals through the courts.
2. He wants nothing more to do with Rangers and is happy to walk away.
3. He expects to be able to win any fight over the scraps after liquidation. This would allow him to have full control over RFC Mark 3 or convert Ibrox to flats or a Tesco if he so desired.
4. Alternatively he is maybe preempting court outcome returning assets to BDO. In which case, who holds them now may be somewhat academic. 5. Now, if, as woodstein suggests, he still holds the image rights then he still stands to gain regardless of the outcome.

I am though inclined to agree with goosygoosy and wait to see what Phil says on the matter or to await verification from Big Pink.

View Comment

neebs67

neebs67Posted on9:48 pm - Jan 11, 2016


Prohibby @ 5.09 PM, having been struck by a pyro at Hampden in 2012 in my opinion this behaviour goes way beyond “daft and irresponsible “. The sooner these idiots realise the danger of what they are doing the better.

View Comment

ianagain

ianagainPosted on9:50 pm - Jan 11, 2016


Did not some of our judicially challenged acquaintances try this game of removing ownership from one another tit for tat for a while?
Or was that at companies house?

View Comment

Avatar

smartie1947Posted on10:08 pm - Jan 11, 2016


On 31/12/15, I sent an e-mail to Nicola Sturgeon complaining about the sectarian singing at the Rangers v Hibs match at Ibrox on 28/12/15. Attached is a copy of the response I received today.

January 2016
Dear Mr =====
Thank you for your email dated 31 December 2015 to the First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon
MSP, regarding sectarian singing at the recent match between Rangers and Hibernian. Your
email has been passed to me to provide a response as policy lead for the Offensive
Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012.
The offensive behaviour at football and threatening communications legislation is intended to
tackle behaviour at regulated football matches which is likely to incite public disorder and
expresses hatred towards other people based on their religious affiliations, race, colour,
nationality, sexual orientation, transgender identity or disability. This type of behaviour is
covered by section 1 of the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening
Communications (Scotland) Act 2012 – covering the offence of “offensive behaviour at
regulated football matches.
In addition to hateful behaviour, this legislation is also used to tackle threatening behaviour,
such as challenging other supporters to fight, and behaviours which are ‘otherwise offensive
to a reasonable person’. ‘Otherwise offensive behaviours’ include songs, chants or banners
expressing support for terrorism or terrorist organisations, or which celebrate events
involving the loss of life or serious injury. More information on what constitutes other
offensive behaviour is covered by the Lord Advocate’s Guidelines to the Act, with particular
reference to page 5 of this document.
Your email is correct in stating the vast majority of supporters attending football matches in
Scotland do not engage in this type of behaviour. In our most recent annual analysis of
charges reported under this Act, covering season 2014-15, 193 charges were reported by
the police to the Procurator Fiscal. This figure represents a fall of 28% from the 267 charges
reported during the first year of the Act’s operation in 2012-13. This small number of
charges show the vast majority of football supporters are well-behaved and simply wish to
support their team. Full information about the types of offences and charges reported by the
St Andrew’s House, Regent Road, Edinburgh EH1 3DG
http://www.gov.scot abcde abc a
police to Procurators Fiscal is available on the Scottish Government’s website. This
document is available at http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2015/06/7911/0.
If you witness a hate crime, or any of the other types of offensive behaviours referenced
above, in relation to a football match in the future I would recommend you report the matter
to Police Scotland. You may do so by either by calling their 101 number; reporting the
incident at your local Hate Crime Third Party Reporting Centre; or by filling out Police
Scotland’s online Hate Crime Form.
I hope the information contained in this reply is helpful.
Your sincerely
==============
===============================================================

The response is clearly disappointing, more a case of laying out the fundamentals of the legislation rather than the specifics of the “offence” and it’s location ie within M/s Sturgeon’s own constituency. By stressing that one’s first action in such a high-profile incident should be a complaint to Police Scotland, which they may report to the Procurator Fiscal, one wonders exactly what is the function of the Safer Communities Divisionstter.who issued the letter That said at least it was a response, albeit inadequate, in my opinion and that is better than our hundreds of items of correspondence to the Scottish football authorities have ever

View Comment

Comments are closed.