I am privileged to have the chance to post a “guest” article on TSFM. As we get used to the lights being turned out, even temporarily, on RTC, we have a new forum for analysing the various issues which concern supporters of Scottish football.
It is undoubtedly the case that most of these issues involve the Rangers FC, either directly or indirectly, together with their interaction with the governing bodies of Scottish football.
One of the matters mentioned on “The List” page here is the Nimmo Smith report. I try to answer the question about what happened to it below, and note the relevance its apparent disappearance has for the soon to convene SPL Independent Commission.
I would encourage anyone who wants to do so to contribute posts for publication to TSFM.
RTC created from nothing a vibrant community looking at serious and complex issues of finance, law and corporate governance with a huge range of expertise, and not a little humour. TSFM can build on that legacy for the good of football in Scotland, and hopefully to the betterment of our media.
Whatever Happened to the Nimmo Smith Report?
On 21st February 2012 the SFA announced that it had appointed retired judge Lord Nimmo Smith to chair an independent inquiry into Rangers FC. His panel comprised Professor Niall Lothian, Past President of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland; Bob Downes, former Director of BT and now Deputy Chairman of the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency, and Stewart Regan, CEO of the SFA.
The Inquiry was commissioned to investigate the potential breach of a number of SFA Articles of Association and to present its findings to the SFA Board within two weeks. Article 62.2 (q) of the SFA Articles of Association allows the SFA Board to appoint “a commission … to attend to and/or determine any matter(s) referred to it by the Board.”
Stewart Regan was quoted saying: “I am delighted Lord Nimmo Smith has agreed to Chair the Independent Inquiry. I am certain the experience contained within the panel will enable us to achieve more clarity on the situation regarding Rangers FC. There will be no further comment on the investigation until it is complete and its findings presented to the Board.”
One wonders about the use of the word “independent”, bearing in mind that one of the members was the CEO of the commissioning body, and on the Board which would consider it once prepared.
On 2nd March Mr Regan had more to say, although the investigation was not yet complete.
“We are now in the final stages of our independent inquiry into the situation concerning Rangers FC. The report by The Right Honourable Lord Nimmo Smith is expected to be completed next week and will go to a Special Board Meeting for consideration. It would be inappropriate to make any further comment at this stage in relation to the details gleaned from the inquiry, the potential contents of the report or any possible sanctions.
On 8th March the Special Board Meeting took place to consider the Nimmo Smith Report. Mr Regan commented:-
“I can confirm that the Scottish FA convened a Special Board Meeting at Hampden Park today to discuss the findings of the Independent Inquiry into Rangers FC, prepared by the Chair, The Right Honourable Lord William Nimmo Smith.
“Principally, it is the belief of the Board, taking into account the prima facie evidence presented today, that Mr Craig Whyte is not considered to be a Fit and Proper person to hold a position within Association Football.
“The report submitted by Lord Nimmo Smith, having been considered fully by the Board, highlights a number of other potential rule breaches by the club and its owner. The report will now be used as evidence and forwarded to a Judicial Panel for consideration and determination as per the protocol.
As such, the report’s contents will not be published at this time. Nevertheless, I can confirm that the club is facing a charge of bringing the game into disrepute.”
On 24th April Mr Regan, following the verdict of the Judicial Panel, said the following:-
“It was entirely right that the original inquiry into Rangers FC and Craig Whyte was conducted independently and chaired by the Right Honourable Lord Nimmo Smith. These findings were presented to the Judicial Panel Tribunal, who returned their verdict last night.”
That all seems clear. Lord Nimmo Smith, with the help of distinguished people like Mr Regan, carried out a quick but thorough investigation, and the results were put to the Judicial Panel for consideration.
However Gary Allan QC, who chaired the Panel, made the following comment on page 59 of the Panel’s written decision.
“It is remarkable that throughout the Judicial Panel Disciplinary Tribunal Process there has been repeated, and regrettably wholly misconceived reference to the Report of Lord Nimmo Smith. For the avoidance of any doubt, the Judicial Panel hearing this disciplinary matter was at no time presented with the report, as evidence or otherwise, nor was it presented with any of its findings. No member of the Tribunal has had sight of it. The report was not mentioned by any party at any time in the course of the proceedings. The determinations which were reached, therefore, were reached entirely independently of any view at which any other person, however senior or eminent, may have arrived in fulfilment of his remit prior to the disciplinary hearing.”
How can the Chair of the Panel deny having seen a document which, according to one of the people who sat on the independent committee, was presented to them?
The answer is two-fold.
Firstly, at pages 2 to 3 of the Judicial Panel decision, the procedural nuts and bolts of the case are discussed:-
“The Tribunal … directed that … it would proceed to hear the evidence and submissions and proceed to Determinations in relation to the complaints against both Rangers FC and Mr Whyte.
The Tribunal … noted that … it would proceed on the basis that there was an absolute denial on (Mr Whyte’s) part of each element of the alleged breach of the rules in all its particulars.
The Tribunal directed that accordingly, and notwithstanding the fact that in its written responses Rangers FC in substantial measure admitted the factual averments and a number of the alleged breaches of the rules, … the Tribunal would require to establish a clear factual basis for its Determination of both any alleged breaches and, if applicable, any sanction against either or both Rangers FC or Mr Whyte. … The commission and the circumstances of the alleged breaches would therefore require to be established by the leading of evidence before the Tribunal …
A discussion in relation to the procedure to be adopted took place. It was agreed that the Compliance Officer Mr Lunny would lead evidence ex parte by submission and reference to documentary material but would lead no witnesses, and would invite the Tribunal to accept the evidence in that form as provided in the Judicial Panel Protocol. Mr McLaughlin for Rangers FC, standing its position on the complaints contained in the written response previously submitted had neither issues with that proposal nor any other objection to the procedure which would be adopted. An opportunity would then be afforded to Rangers FC to lead evidence and make submissions as Mr McLaughlin on its behalf saw fit. Mr McLaughlin intimated that he would be likely to lead evidence from four witnesses previously intimated to the Compliance Officer and the Tribunal in terms of the Judicial Panel Protocol.”
At the hearing the positions of Rangers FC and of Mr Whyte were totally at odds. Mr Whyte did not appear nor lodge any substantive reply. He denied everything. On the other hand, Rangers FC “in substantial measure admitted the factual averments and a number of the alleged breaches of the rules”. As the Panel determined, they needed to be satisfied of the right verdict based on the evidence, but as the “prosecution case” was generally admitted, there was less rigour about this than if, for example, Mr Whyte had attended and denied the charges.
If Mr Whyte had appeared to deny the allegations, or if Rangers FC had disputed them, then evidence would have had to come from witnesses, who could have been cross-examined. In that event it would not have been sufficient to present the Nimmo Smith report, because, for all his experience, expertise and eminence, he is not guaranteed to be infallible.
One important principle in judicial and quasi-judicial procedure is the “Best Evidence rule”. If possible, original documents should be produced, rather than copies. Items of physical evidence should be brought to the court, rather than photographs of it. Witnesses should give evidence rather than having witness statements provided to the hearing.
This, I think, provides part of the explanation for the apparently mysterious absence of the Nimmo Smith Report.
The facts of the case had been admitted by the only party who attended the hearing, namely Rangers FC. Therefore Mr Lunny led “evidence ex parte by submission and reference to documentary material”. The Panel made 108 separate “findings in fact” derived from the evidence he put forward and that of Rangers FC.
Where Lord Nimmo Smith’s committee had, for example, analysed documents and offered a conclusion upon their import, the documents would be evidence but His Lordship’s conclusion would not. Similarly where a witness had been interviewed by the Nimmo Smith commission, or provided a statement, the former judge’s views on that would not be evidence, but the witness statement would be.
Mr Lunny, the Compliance Officer, was acting as prosecutor. Effectively Lord Nimmo Smith played the role of a senior detective co-ordinating an investigation, but not actually obtaining any evidence himself. In a criminal trial, where the officer in charge of the investigation has taken no part in the accumulation of the evidence, then their relevance as a witness is very small at best. It is up to the judge or the jury to decide what the totality of evidence means as far as guilt or innocence is concerned.
Therefore whilst I am sure that Lord Nimmo Smith’s report was on Mr Lunny’s table as he went through his presentation, ticking off the relevant parts as he led the primary evidence, the Report itself was not “relevant” evidence for the Panel. It is likely that, in discussion prior to the hearing, Mr Lunny and the solicitor for Rangers FC agreed whether the Nimmo Smith report would be used or not.
Mr Regan said prior to the Panel sitting “The report will now be used as evidence and forwarded to a Judicial Panel for consideration and determination as per the protocol.“ The presentation of the case of course was independent of him, and whilst the Report would have formed the basis for the charges laid against Rangers FC and Mr Whyte, it was not evidence itself, as agreed between the parties.
The second aspect which accords with this explanation is the precise phrase used by Mr Regan. He said, after the decision, “These findings were presented to the Judicial Panel Tribunal.”
He did not say that the report was presented, rather that the findings were. As the findings would form the basis for the “charges” admitted by Rangers FC, then to that extent the Nimmo Smith report played a part in the proceedings.
This issue has relevance now for the forthcoming SPL proceedings involving player payments and registrations which might have broken the rules. To great clamour and consternation from Ibrox direction, Harper MacLeod, the widely respected and highly rated form of solicitors, have carried out an investigation for the SPL into Rangers FC.
Mr Green has made clear that, as far as possible, the case will be fought, and no past titles will be stripped if he can do anything about it. Expect calls for the Harper MacLeod report to be produced.
However, it is in exactly the same position as the Nimmo Smith report was, except this time the accused is not accepting guilt. In that case, the relevant documents and witnesses will need to attend for scrutiny and examination.
On the basis that the First Tier Tax Tribunal, which looked at different but related issues, took many days to conclude, it is highly likely that the SPL case will not have a quick conclusion.
As a final aside, I must compliment Mr Green. All of the media speculation about punishment in the event that the independent commission find guilt on the part of Rangers repeats the mantra from Ibrox that the most severe penalty, namely stripping of titles, is the aim of the SPL.
I suspect that the SPL might believe that too now, on the basis that something which the club and the fans oppose so vigorously must be a draconian penalty.
But, of all of the various penalties listed, stripping titles would not cost the Rangers FC a single penny. The issue has already seen the supporters unite behind their team. Even if the commission finds the case proven, and as a result Rangers lose some of their historic titles, this will be seen by the Ibrox faithful as yet more treachery by the football authorities. Bearing in mind that the SPL rules allow various penalties, including the power to expel the club, impose unlimited fines and place a registration embargo on the club, altering the history books is the best thing for Rangers as a business, rather than a penalty which affects them just now.
Posted by Paul McConville – www.scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com
Brillianr forensic examination of the case Paul.
One comment. At the rate the Scottish legal brains? ? are being discredited it will soon be impossible to find any untarnished legal official, retired or otherwise, to chair a panel on behalf of Scottish football.
Paul
Did the Nimmo enquiry have any published Terms of Reference and do we know exactly what parts of the SFA rules were broken?
I mean somebody must have directed the commission to look at something and in directing them at one point they were not directing them at another.
Only someobody with something to hide would be so secretive and it was’nt Craig Wyhte but if Terms of Reference were published we can rest easy that the enquiry was not part of a cover up of SFA operations..
http://www.skysports.com/radio
Charles on in 2 minutes claiming 3 billionaire backers
So if The Rangers have 3 billionaire backers why will anybody need to buy shares? Can’t Chuck just donate shares in The Rangers Football Club Ltd back pro-rata to the shareholders & fans who got stiffed for shares & debentures with Oldco?
Speculation on outcomes in the event that oldco are found NOT guilty by the independent SPL commission …
A continuing process of more and more documents and reportage evidence being placed before the public and MSM via t’internet sources until the matter is fully explained – lasting possibly years. A cloud hanging over football in Scotland, the authorities that run our game, and both oldco and newco due to the continuing presence of current management that were involved with the previous oldco management until satisfactory resolution reached – again lasting possibly years – maybe more than a generation.
Insightful and relevant Paul, thanks
This remains a corrupt and dirty game where if you are not in the inner sanctums you don’t get a voice and instead get fed the pre-agreed bull.
And that applies to clubs, fans and even Judges and QCs on independent panels
And there has been so much bull much of it co-ordinated.
And attempts to first patch over, then save, then restore.
And now re-imagineering of ways to get Rangers back to “their rightful place at the top”.
But history is being recorded as it unfolds and it will not be kind to the SFA, SFL and SPL committees and governance.
The facts will prove to be their downfall exposing their conflicts of interest, their sleights of hand and finagling.
I’ve said before the decline and fall of Rangers is not about football and probably noy even about business.
It is a simple Shakespearian tragedy about power corrupting and absolute power corrupting absolutely.
As a TSFM community we need to do what it says on our tin.
We can do this by creating a “Monitor Sheet” on our Blog listing the questions in a logical manner that need answers.
And the facts pertaining.
So one of our questions is “What were the findings of the Nimmo Smith Report”?
Who stopped it reporting etc?
3 billionaires eh?
Well thats only £40m each to pay back the Creditors
Mere chickenfeed for the prize for the prize of looking a soldier in the face without blushing
Goosy says:
August 10, 2012 at 11:15
0 0 Rate This
3 billionaires eh?
=============
How many of them are Motherwell born, I wonder.
Charles explains his use of the word bigotry
” If you look in the dictionary,its from the french word bigotaire and its people who have an opposing view to yours,its only in scotland it is linked with religion,i wasnt speaking in a religious sense ”
—————
really Charles ? -you were however aware that you were speaking in Scotland to a Scottish audience and as such are well aware how this word would be interpreted by your audience .
A pathetic and weasel excuse for your dog whistle speech .
Charles explains his use of the word bogitry
” If you look in the dictionary,its from the french word big0taire and its people who have an opposing view to yours,its only in scotland it is linked with religion,i wasnt speaking in a religious sense ”
—————
really Charles ? -you were however aware that you were speaking in Scotland to a Scottish audience and as such are well aware how this word would be interpreted by your audience .
A pathetic and weasel excuse for your dog whistle speech .
TSFM and Paul McC
Thought-provoking analysis and carries on the great tradition of RTC in tremendous style.
As althetime says above, is there any reason why the Nimmo-Smith report should not be made public?
From the analysis above, it would appear that the NS report has not been viewed in full by the Judicial Panel Tribunal, though it has seen the findings. Does this leave room for important evidence that might have been uncovered in the report to have been effectively suppressed if Lunny decided it was not required to support his case?
Given that Regan sat on the NS panel and the SFA is due to be the appeal body for the SPL investigation (I think?), does this mean that the NS report cannot be seen by the SPL investigation? If it does have sight of it, would Regan have to stand aside from any appeal panel? would be interested to hear from moreinformed postershow that will be set up. (“Set up” probably being the operative phrase I fear)
You are also spot on to point out that stripping of titles is the least damaging thing that could / should happen to Frankengers.
Thanks again for continuing to bring clarity to issues that would otherwise remain obscure to those of us without the necessary knowledge.
Good Afternoon,
sorry to be slightly off topic but below is a response to the ” No Man is an island” post of the other day which Paul McConville gratiously made room for on his own blog.
I appreciate that we are discussing Nimmo Smith– the Bermuda Triangle of judicial reports in that it disappears mysteriously without trace— but there is a connection here in that documents that disappear and then suddenly resurface– or their terms resurface when it suddenly suits someone– seem to be a recurring theme in this whole saga.
Murray has said that the players are due to repay loans. Do you expect the players to agree?
Repeated personalities involved in this affair are suddenly crying ” see my agent- I left everything to him!”.
Agents are registered and have to have a bond or an insurance to cover them in case they make an ass of it. That bond or insurance is lodged with……………… the people that know….SFA!
No Man is an Island….. not in this sea of extremely troubled waters!
—————————————————————————————————————————
Good Afternoon,
One of the points about the article above and the links referred to is that this whole scenario is set to embroil any number of people far beyond the players and the representatives of the club. Where it takes them?– God alone knows.
Blair Morgan retired– or at least stood back from his business in 2008 I believe. However, prior to that he operated across Europe in the football world, and as he says himself, much of his work came from England, where, at the bigger clubs at least EBT’s were commonplace at one time.
I am sure that he would have looked into EBT’s in his professional capacity, and like many before him, have been told, and even concluded, that EBT’s properly operated are– or at least were– a legal way of rewarding employees on a non remunerative & non contractual basis.
So far we have heard from some players who say that they left everything to their agents. Yet others- whose names I cannot recall– have indicated that they were not keen on the EBT idea– or that their agents were not keen– only to be told by Rangers that it was their way or the Highway. If I recall correctly, one player– actually sacked their agent under such circumstances and paddled his own canoe.
It is entirely possible that guys like Blair Morgan negotiated the basic contract and simply advised the clients that Rangers employed an EBT scheme over and above the contracts– but whatever those arrangements were had nothing to do with the agent. That, however, seems unlikely.
It is much more likely that for whatever reason, Rangers entered into a series of contracts and side letters which together made up the entire contractual package, and that agents like Blair Morgan had Rangers PLC sign absolutely tight and binding disclaimers and indemnities which were designed to protect his clients from any future liability should the tax man come calling.
What was perhaps completely unforseen was the perfect storm that has since engulfed Rangers PLC— from the Big Tax Case right down to the shannanigans of Craig Whyte. With Rangers PLC now going into Liquidation, any such indemnities and guarantees are now worthless unless they are personally guaranteed by someone like Murray and I doubt he would have agreed to that.
However, key amongst the statements from Murray is the peddled notion that all these guys obtained loans and that they are all due to pay the money back with interest! I can only imagine that everyone who is named so far as being an EBT beneficiary– and remember so far all but Billy Dodds appears to have had to “apply” to receive any money at all– will have been on like a shot to their agents and lawyers to make absolutely sure that Sir David is talking the utmost mince!!!
I don’t expect for a minute that any player is going to admit that he “borrowed” the money that was paid via the EBT and is due to pay it back.
So why don’t the press— Traynor, Spiers, Chic, Guiidi, Tom English, Mark Daly, Thommo, or anyone else– simply go and ask all the guys named on the list if they accept what David Murray has said and that at some point they will be paying the money back to the trust?
It is a simple question. Yes or No?
No doubt– most will refuse to answer or will cite their agents as the font of all knowledge and at that they can go and ask guys like Blair Morgan and Trevor Steven etc.
They in turn may cite client confidentiality and stay schtum.
However, where does any such confidentiality lie in the face of an SPL enquiry?
In the event of a criminal investigation, there is no such thing as client confidentiality— you cannot hide behind that.
Further the SPL, can demand all papers from anyone relating to a players contract or their renumeration.
A liquidator can bring a civil claim, set out what appears to be a prima facie case that the renumeration was paid and that there is tax outstanding– and then hey presto– someone is going to have to speak out to save their own skin.
Was the Murray press release a first shot? Was he saying ” Look all of this is above board and there is no tax to pay! BUT in the event of the scheme being improperly administered and so attracting tax, don’t just come knocking on my door– all these players signed docs saying that they borrowed money, that they agreed to pay it back plus interest, and in that way there is no tax due on money that is contractually repayable!”
If the trustees were so biddable– and remember that they did the bidding of MIH as well as Rangers– for all we know, Murray could have them
( the trustees ) seek repayment– or offer terms for early repayment.
I appreciate that under all other circumstances none of these so called loans are normally repaid– but David Murray is staring down the barrell of a gun here– as he could be faced with a demand for the vast majority of the sums due by Rangers PLC to HMRC. I am not aware of circumstances where such a famously wealthy man has faced such potential personal ruin.
However, what I am certain of, is that under such circumstances, Murray will try to ensure that anyone who has so far escaped taxes will not be allowed to walk away scot free while he is left holding the baby!!!
If that then means holding former players and managers to signed contractual documents that no one thought would ever see the light of day again then so be it.
The players and managers would then have to get on to their agents and ask where the hell they stand and at that point it is every man for themselves given the sums involved.
Remember that Billy Dodds stated that he was asked personally by Sir David Murray if he would accept payment through the EBT. Dodds in turn says he left everything to his agent– on the understanding that the tax had in fact been paid on his settlement.
Stop and think about that– as the two statements are neither mutually exclusive nor smack of falsehood. Dodds is saying-” Hey I was told that Rangers had paid the tax–and I left it to my legally appointed agent to make sure it was so! If the tax has not been paid, then Rangers are in breach of their agreement ( per David Murray personally ) with me and they should pay it. If they now can’t pay it, and Murray isn’t paying it, and I am then asked to pay it– then I will consider my position but I have a claim against my agent as he should never have left me in such a position!”
All agents are insured– or have to have a bond with the SFA. At one point, that bond had to be for £100,000– I don’t know what it stands at today— but given the sums of money involved here– there is every possibility that the insurances and bonds would not cover the damage.
As I have said before– the FTT decision– will unleash such a firestorm and such a series of possibilities and consequences— that the vast majority of those involved, those reporting, and those observing have have so far never even seen those consequences coming let alone considered what to do with them when they arrive.
The Liquidator is coming– with the sole purpose of chasing people for the outstanding tax– and anyone who thinks that the guys in the firing line are going to hesitate in using all and any arguments to save their own bacon, or as much of their own bacon as possible, are deluding themselves.
The MBBGEF has shown how right he was, when he told Alex Thomson there was no chance of him appearing in front of the SFA cos he believed they were an irrelevance. Time has proved him correct.
SFA=Toothless, supine and irrelevant.
Scottish fitba DOES need something a wee bit more substantial.
(As always, whilst typing the above, I’m hoping I’ll soon be proved wrong because they have been cunningly playing a long game… I also believe in the tooth fairy.)
How can Nimmo-Smith, Lord Hodge, et al allow their names to be used in this way.
I would imagine Nimmo -Smith is seething at the way he has been used. Further, he must speak out or allow his good name be forever associated with this scandal.
You all know the old adage ‘for evil to exist all is required is for good men………….’
If Green’s explanation/cringing excuse is accepted by the SFA then that will leave the same explanation/excuse open to everyone, particularly Vladimir Romanov, whose lack of knowledge of the ‘Scots’ meaning to whatever words he chooses to use is bound to be a far more acceptable explanation than for someone from far off Yorkshire!
If the word had been used by, say, someone from Dundee Utd about preferencial treatment given to, say, Aberdeen, they’d have been very lucky to get away with it, but when used by the CEO of Rangers, the most bogited organisation in Scotland, there is no way it was not intended to further inflame the Ibrox hordes. And besides, whatever the context of the word, it was a clear insult aimed at the SFA! In Scotland (particularly in football), the use of the word is far more serious than any description Romanov made of the SFA, the use of a word like Mafia being far less inflamatory than Bogitry! In fact, on a scale of 1 – 10 of inflamatory words, Mafia might be around 3 while accusing someone, or some organisation, of bogitry is definitely off the scale!
timtim says:
August 10, 2012 at 11:46
Charles explains his use of the word bogitry
” If you look in the dictionary,its from the french word big0taire and its people who have an opposing view to yours,its only in scotland it is linked with religion,i wasnt speaking in a religious sense ”
————————————–
Sacre Bleue! Charles thought he was en France!
I have to say, as an old paranoid Tim, who believed the whole Scottish establishment to be corrupt, I was beginning to be more optimistic when I read the glowing character references that some of our more legally-aware posters were giving to the bigwigs involved in the various investigations. But now……..Plus ca change Charles?
If I am reading this correctly you are suggesting that Mr Green may be influencing the outcome of the investigations by suggesting at great length that the stripping of titles is the worst punishment that could be applied (even if it is the cheapest). “methinks he doth protest ower much” I think may be the quote applicable!! Surely not that would be akin to trial fixing!!! They would never stoop that low – would they?
Email to David Longmuir.
Attn David Longmuir.
Dear sir.
Having read the Scotsman article today on the new Scottish Football Monitor blog, which is a continuation of the Orwell prize winning Rangers Tax Case blog, i must say i was disturbed to see the article, without actual quotes, make the reader believe that if as likely rfc have been winning competitions in Scotland for over a decade while using players registered illegally to hide a multi million pound tax scam, the sfl are happy for the ex club to have these tainted trophies retained on their historical records. If this is true then i, and i certainly wont be the only one, will never attend a league cup fixture again, and will do everything in my power to lobby sponsors of future competitions that this is a corrupted tournament. I think everyone has realised that the ordinary fan is sick of supporting organisations who have systematically failed all other clubs for the sake of one establishment team. Who would have thought that the club would be liquidated and a new entity would have to break more rules to be elevated into the sfl in their place. Ordinary fans achieved this against the wishes of the sfa/spl/sfl/rfc/sevco/msm and alex salmond, the new media has allowed us a voice and rallying point and we will continue to grow and demand integrity in every aspect of scottish football. In this spirit i expect an answer from yourself to allay my fears that a club in this country can evade 135million pounds of debt and break football rules and continue history intact and sanction free from rulebreaking. I trust you yourself would like to clear up any misunderstanding if the Scotsmans article has misrepresented you.
Thank you.
rab, did you have a personal e-mail for Longmuir or was it just the enquiries@scotprem.com ?
I have also e-mailed today, but have only ever been able to find the wholly unsatisfactory “enquiries” address.
does anybody else think the reluctance of FIFA & UEFA to get involved is because if they pull at the EBT / player-registration thread then who knows were it might all unravel?
As BRTH has stated above numerous English clubs also use EBT’s. Perhaps not as improperly or apparently fraudulently as Rangers did however the whole question of players becoming ineligible is a massive and serious issue.
If Rangers players are found to have breached eligibility perhaps in hvndreds of instances then that is a very bad thing for football as seasons worth of results become compromised in Scottish & UEFA matches but if you add in all the English clubs who also operated the scheme you are looking at thousands and thousands of matches both domestic and european then compromised.
Now that EBT schemes have largely been stopped and that loophole closed I reckon the football authorities would rather look the other way than looks what underneath this stone and all it’s potentially negative consequences – especially when it involves some of the most lucrative football clubs in the most lucrative league in Europe.
Too much bad publicity me thinks?
Nice post and explained a lot.
“However, it is in exactly the same position as the Nimmo Smith report was, except this time the accused is not accepting guilt. In that case, the relevant documents and witnesses will need to attend for scrutiny and examination.
I have a question about the above and who the “accused” is. Without re-opening a troll-ridden debate about whether there is a new “club” or not I cannot see how the SFL could dress this up in a way that the “accused” are the club, or the people running it now.
That should really be a very sparsely populated front bench for the “accused”.
Celtic have at least two billionaires as shareholders but we never read anything in the press of having wealth off the radar. Those rankers fns in the msm can’t help themselves. What chance to we ever have of honesty from them when they can’t even be honest with themselves. Dillusional fools.
Smell the glove
August 10, 2012 at 14:02
Maybe it’s just me, but this seems to be the only blog allowing comments, “about TSFM” & “Digging the hole” are both closed to comments as far as I can see.
Smell the glove says:
August 10, 2012 at 14:05
Dillusional Slugs…fixed that for you.
Other than the obvious I can’t understand how it can be remotely difficult to prove or disprove the contractual v discretionary and / or dual contracts issues once and for all.
Without any detailed knowledge of the world of football agents I am fairly certain that they are remunerated on the basis of a percentage of what they negotiate for a client.
In exactly the same way that it is simply not believable that a footballer would take the chance that a goodly proportion of his earnings would be paid on a discretionary basis (don’t even bother adding the loan aspect), would any agent agree to being paid a percentage of the declared contractual amount and kissing goodbye to his slice of the ebt?
No, I didn’t think so either.
Where are these liquidators?
It really is time for the liquidation to commence. I am not well versed in Scots law, but the idea that the judge should delay liquidation pending a report from the administrators has always struck me as bizarre. The delay has simply played into the hands of Sevco and the Administrators, plenty of time to shuffle properties out of sight, “clean up” the books, etc, etc. And of course kick the can down the road while Sevco were being shoehorned into the SFL. What is the worst that the judge can do on receipt of the Administrators’ report? Anything more than the liquidators could have done anyway? Delay, delay, delay- I know that several posters have spoken highly of our learned friend, but I smell the smell of rat in all this highly convenient delay.
The full description again from Wikipedia.
‘A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from their own or intolerant of people of different political views, ethnicity, race, class, religion, profession, sexuality or gender.’
Just select the ‘wee bit’ (Scottish phrase) that suits chic.
Just back in,2 or 3 Billionaires want to invest in Sevco my Arse, the deadline for buying ST’s is
7pm tonight,another pathetic attempt to hoodwink the fans.
My god are the Bears really this feckin’ stupid.Then again…….
bestdressedchicken.
I just went on the sfl site and into the contact us bit. If anyone has a better way to reach DL it would be appreciated.
Someone suggested a contacts list for the blog. This is a great idea as i would fire off even more emails than i do. I was going to compile a list and may do if one doesn’t appear soon, but in all honesty there must be better equiped people on the blog who will do a better job than i.
Off the radar wealth of an investor…yaddayadda … I wonder when the true Rangers fans will take the lesson learned …
Once, with SDM saw them deeply in debt and avoiding tax to fund the football side, with the resultant sale on to the shyster CG.
Twice, CW simply doesnt pay VAT/PAYE after he takes charge, again to fund the football and the club is to be no more.
Thrice, CG is running the football club like one of Beyonce’s stage outfits – it has no properly verifiable means of support. Almost exactly the same formula – ‘ got lotsa money but I cant make it clear where its coming from/ who its coming from, but its there’. . . adopting the same overspending strategy to put a team together and on the pitch that they cant afford – allegedly to simply keep up with the required success rate the club deserves/return to ‘where they belong’.
If the lesson holds true – this can only end one way.
Re Mr Grren’s comment re ‘bigotry’ – according to my Collins English Dictionary a bigot is one who is intolerant of any ideas other than theor own “ESPECIALLY ON RELIGION, POLITICS, OR RACE”
Jammy Dodger.
We agree, the intervention of THE Judge always baffled me. Up until now the only ones who have benifited from this intervention are the ones at the very centre of this scandal.
I suppose at the end of the process, that This Judge initiated the report will end up like all the other reports! – How do you spell swannee correctly.
Previously on RTC and now on TSFM people hae put great faith in the judges.
I never have! Carrloway walks away in silence, and the rest are hiding behind procedure.
Establishment? the Judges, the football chiefs, the media, the polticians are all in one way or another craven members of the establishment. t’was ever thus
Coming soon; Chuckles explains his use of the word phoenix
‘If you look in the dictionary, it’s from the French word Phénix and it’s a big shiny mythical sacred firebird, it’s only in Scotland it’s linked with a company shedding all liabilities, I wasn’t speaking in a shafting creditors sense’
Another enlightening article Paul. You’re dead right about Green. He couldn’t give a toss about club history. He just doesn’t want to pay the money. I found Craig Beattie’s remarks in this morning’s MSM quite interesting. According to Beattie the Englishman pulled the plug on his signing – but Ally wanted him on the team. If I was Ally I wouldn’t be a happy chappie. Great to see this blog up and running.
By the time the decision has been reached, the accused will be well underway in the process of liquidation.
“The Rangers Football Club” and their fans may have an emotional interest; but they have no legal or procedural concern in whether or not Rangers Football Club are stripped of historic trophies.
Charlie Brown says:
August 10, 2012 at 13:53
You may be right, Charlie, but I suspect it’s more a case of Platini’s call for Financial Fairplay is just a load of window dressing and there is no real desire to get involved in ensuring it comes about. I, at first, thought UEFA and FIFA would welcome the chance to get involved with a case like this in a small inconsequential league, but maybe they do fear the backlash, in other, even more financially doped countries where more than one club is known to be financed improperly, and not just by EBTs.
English clubs EBTs – word in the dusty smokeroom of a local lawyers golf club is that the english clubs and the hmrc have quietly reached a pence in the pound deal shortly after rangers were liquidated. Apologies if this is old news.
sheep on gullane hill says:
August 10, 2012 at 15:42
0 0 Rate This
English clubs EBTs – word in the dusty smokeroom of a local lawyers golf club is that the english clubs and the hmrc have quietly reached a pence in the pound deal shortly after rangers were liquidated. Apologies if this is old news.
==========================================================================
that may or may not be true however from a football perspective were they properly registered? If Rangers are found to have fielded a massive amount of ineligible players because of their EBT payments weren’t declared then technically it’s possible that similarly hundreds of english football matches have been similarly compromised. Will anybody investigate? does anybody care enough? will anything happen?
Excellant post’s by Paul mc and BRTH both showing how corrupt the msm,sfa,spl,sfl really are.All these organisation’s know what they are doing and know they will not be held to account by anyone outside of this site.It is also clear that fifa and eufa have no intention of stepping in and making the sfa stick to the rule’s.
Why are our guardian’s being allowed to make a mockery of every rule.They have proved to us all time after time that they should not be running a sunday pub league never mind national game.They have shown us that they are not shamed and will not resign from the gravy train that is scottish football.
I like many other’s can only hope that bdo will not be corrupted the same way that everyone else has as soon as they come into contact with dead club and it’s spawn
Try again ,3rd time . 2 or 3 Billionaires want to invest in Sevco my Ars3 , the deadline for ST’s is 7 pm tonight, just another pathetic attempt to hoodwink the fans.
My god, are the bears really this dumb. Then again……..
sheep on gullane hill says:
August 10, 2012 at 15:42
Could be viewed as a major victory for HMRC without any evidence the other clubs f***ed up their EBT process.
We’re all in trouble for failing to “listen here” but who are “they”.
SDM said in the Sun on 7 August 2012, “I’m not going to accept this any more. If they don’t listen here, I’m going to come back again later in the week with another statement.”
“They” have clearly not been listening so the promised statement must be imminent.
The piece in The Sun was described as an “exclusive Interview” which normally is a conversation between two people (the interviewer and the interviewee) where questions are asked by the interviewer to obtain information from the interviewee. Only SDM appears to have spoken at this interview. MSM still running to form.
P.S. I found the copy of The Sun that I read on the bus.
Below is a copy of an email sent to the Government Minister. I suggest this is the way to go (not only to Gov Ministers) if we want to progress our ultimate goal – fair play for all, cheating out.
To the Minister in charge of sport funding,
As a taxpayer, I strongly request you to reconsider granting any monies to the Scottish League Cup. the reason behind my request is. the authorities in charge of administering this League Cup do not appear to want to carry out their responsibilities i.e. they allow and have allowed in the recent past a particular club cheat their way to acquiring this cup/cups. This action has led to other clubs participating in this competition having financially suffered because of these authorities not carrying out their obligations with regard to the compitition’s fair play and transparency policy.
I will be publishing a copy of this email on the blog SFM and RTC.
Yours in Sport,
a concerned taxpayer.
Got the following email from Supporters Direct a couple of hours ago. The Falkirk conference ( essentially about ‘re-structuring’) has been postponed.
“Dear Colleague,
The Scottish Conference forms an integral part of our Annual Year, and with the Arab Spring this Summer, this years Conference is the most important for many years. Many changes are required to our game; many have been proposed, but reforms, and the processes for reform have not yet materialised. We want Conference to form a pivotal role in these reforms, and this has necessitated a postponement to a later date, in order that your views are collated and heard, and are inserted into the process towards a viable solution.
Please accept our apologies for the postponement. A full refund will be issued ASAP.
Kind regards,
Vicki
Vicki Goodfellow
Events & Admin Co-ordinator
During the Olympics (27th July to 12th August) we will not be based in the main office. If you need to call please use our mobile numbers during this time. Thank you for your cooperation.
3rd Floor, Victoria House
Bloomsbury Square
London, WC1B 4SE
t: +44 (0)20 7273 1592
m: +44 (0) 7506 741 668
e: enquiries@supporters-direct.coop
Re the Guest blog, I think Mr. McConville has identified the nature and purpose of the Nimmo-Smith Report pretty well. That being so, it was akin to a report by the police to the procurator fiscal and shall not see the light of day. Harper Macleod’s similarly will not be disclosed.
===================
Re. Charles Green – I think someone has already mentioned, what does he have on Walter that ended Walter’s clarion call that was “time for Rangers men”?
I don’t think I have witnessed as quick and elegant a volte-face since the late, lamented John Curry in the Innsbruck Olympics. And not a word from Walter about why he changed his mind. Not a question from the press either that I can recall.
===================
Re BRT&H’s post above, I think the writ practically writes itself when it comes to suing any adviser who allowed a client to sign any form of prima facie loan contract (EBT) for remuneration which was contractually due. It does not matter what collateral warranties or indemnities were issued, since the company granting them went into liquidation which is a perfectly foreseeable eventuality.
This could be the lengthiest and most costly litigation Scotland has ever seen with party after party being brought in to the action as each claims relief against the other. It is akin some might think, to Dicken’s Jarndyce v Jarndyce…that would of course mean that Ibrox was “Bleak House”.
=====================
P.S. My old English teacher, Mr. Lennon, introduced a bunch of us spotty fifteen year olds to John Donne back in the eighties. One of the poems I recall was Elegy XX – To His Mistress Going to Bed. We were tickled (the girls were horrified) by the notion of the ageing Donne perving over his nubile mistress with the words:-
“Oh, my America, my Newfoundland,”
Quite racy really, now that I’ve re-read it after all this time.
Found this on RM,ow unlike my complaint which I copied over here I don’t have this persons complaint to the BBC.What I will say though is he got a far more detailed response than I did 🙁 but I thought that the new club were meant to be “The rangers football club”,& not as described by the BBC.Anyway here it is for others to pick over
………………………………………..
Posted Today, 02:26 PM
I got this today:
Dear Mr. MightyBears
Thank you for your comments regarding the commentary during the Brechin City v Rangers football match on ‘Sportsound’, transmitted on Sunday 29 July.
We are sorry that you were offended by Rob Maclean’s comments, but we can assure you that they were not motivated by bias and certainly there was no intention to antagonise.
We also discuss and assess the broadcast output, including the commentaries, with our commentators and please be assured that the points you have raised have been taken into account in this process.
On the specific point, raised by a number of complainants, regarding the use of terminology to describe the club, the points below, from the Head of Sport, may help to explain our position on this issue.
“It’s important for the BBC’s audience that a clear distinction is made between the former Rangers company and the new company owned by Charles Green’s consortium – and the football entity formerly known as “Rangers FC”.
“The Scottish Football Association has confirmed to BBC Scotland that a conditional club membership has been registered by Charles Green’s Sevco (Scotland) Ltd, and for sporting purposes will be referred to as “Rangers Football Club”. The company formerly known as “The Rangers Football Club PLC” is currently in administration and will inevitably be liquidated.
“The parent company owned by Charles Green is currently registered with Companies House as “Sevco (Scotland) Ltd.” – this is the company which Mr Green claims has purchased all of Rangers’ assets – purportedly including Ibrox Stadium, Murray Park, the Albion St car park, the player registrations and the club’s membership of the Scottish Football Association and its share in the Scottish Premier League.
“At a meeting on Monday 4 July 2012, the SPL voted unanimously to reject an application to transfer the old company’s share in the SPL to Mr Green’s Sevco. Subsequently, Sevco applied for membership of the Scottish Football League, and, following a vote at Hampden on Friday 13 July, was accepted into the SFL setup. Also at that vote, Sevco was refused entry to SFL Division One, but was offered a place in SFL Division Three – and, subject to Scottish Football Association approval, the newco will start life in the SFL Third Division. At this stage, Sevco has only reached an agreement in principle to participate in the Scottish Football League Third Division – as it has only been granted a conditional SFA licence.
“Given this, in the interests of clarity for the audience, BBC Scotland will continue to make the distinction between off-field and on-field activity in relation to the newco, where appropriate, in order to accurately reflect the legal status of the parent company and the football registration status of the club.
“Our position, in sporting terms, from this point is that Rangers will be referred to as Rangers.
“The Rangers story, which is fast-moving and complicated even for those who follow it most closely, is one that needs to be told fairly and clearly and I believe that our journalism is well up to that task.”
Thank you for sharing your concerns.
Kind RegardsBBC Complaintswww.bbc.co.uk/complaints
I’ve had a bit of bother with the pc this afternoon; thing seemed to jam and freeze when i tried to paste an email into the comments box. I don’t think it went, so here it is.
It is the text of an email I sent earlier today to ”The Scotsman”, and forwarded to Longmuir at the SFL email address, and copied to a number of SFL clubs.
The originals show my correspondence address, of course, but I’ve not left that on here.
“Dear Editor,
I read with absolute disgust the reported statement by David Longmuir, CEO of the Scottish Football League in which he said that Ibrox club’s excellent League Cup record would be allowed to stand whatever the outcome of an independent investigation into whether the Ibrox team had fielded players who , allegedly, were paid sums of money that were, against the the Articles of Association, not disclosed to the SFA in the contracts relating to their terms and conditions of service.
This contemptible statement is further proof that some elements of Scottish Football administration are bereft not only of principles, but of common savvy.
There will be many members of the SFL who will be enraged at the arrogation of a decision-making power that is not in his personal gift.
And, with the general public’s heightened awareness ( due to the coverage of the Olympic Games) of ‘fair play’ and the impartial application of sporting rules, Longmuir will be seen as being ready,in principle, to defend sporting cheatery .
I urge his fellow-members in the SFL to call for his immediate resignation on two counts: first, because his message is utterly unacceptable in itself, and secondly, because by his crassly partisan statement he has probably done more to hasten the death of Scottish Football even than RFC(IA) has done.
Green & McCoist charged. Details on sfa site.
http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&drKey=1082&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fkerrydalestreet.co.uk%2Ftopic%2F8719788%2F86%2F%3Ftw_p%3Dtwt&v=1&libid=1344612497375&out=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.scottishfa.co.uk%2Fscottish_fa_news.cfm%3Fpage%3D1961%26newsCategoryID%3D1%26newsID%3D10362&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fkerrydalestreet.co.uk%2Ftopic%2F8719788%2F85%2F%3Ftw_p%3Dtwt&title=Generic%20SFL%20thread&txt=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.scottishfa.co.uk%2Fscottish_fa_news.cfm%3Fpage%3D1961%26amp%3BnewsCategoryID%3D1%26amp%3BnewsID%3D10362&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_13446125853731
Never been to KDS before, but this has just been posted from the Complaince office at the SFA
apols if already posted.
NOTICE OF COMPLAINT FROM SFA
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=1961&newsCategoryID=1&newsID=10362
Finally. Better late than never though, well done SFA.
I, like many, I’m sure, who read this blog, have never had the confidence to post comments or make known an opinion. Much better to leave that to the people who know what they’re talking about. However, after reading several of the new revelations I feel it is now important to stress that it is of the upmost importance that this blog continues. Never again must we let the powerful in Scottish society dictate, hide, deflect and lie to the people. It has happened time and time again, not just in sport but across the whole of Scottish life, for many, many years. At last the people are being told the truth, warts and all.
We’re now able to judge for ourselves based on reasoned discussion rather than flagrant propaganda, rather than being told what to think by our ‘betters’.
The times are a-changing and I thank you all for it. For the first time in my life, I can see real change coming, real transparency. I have hope for the future.
Who’da thunk Scottish Football and a few bampots could have driven such a social revolution.
For sure, there’s a long way to go but God bless you one and all and please keep on fighting the good fight.
Rob
Well done SFA
Not really, Green and Ally do not need to turn up, they have nothing to do with Rangers FC. That is the club in administration.
SFA are a bunch of dummies.
its sally and green thats been served with the notice not the club
answers and fines and dug-out bans to be had
I heard Ally has requested a season long touchline ban, that way he can sit in the bus and keep out of the wind and rain.
nowoldandgrumpy says:
August 10, 2012 at 17:08
0 6 Rate This
——————
I got that one wrong. 🙂
When will we hear about the SFL dealing with sectarian singing at Brechin?
I presume there was no sectarian singing at Ibrox during the East Fife game as it wasnt mentioned anywhere in the MSM
MALCOLM MURRAY says the club will defend both Ally McCoist
and Charles Green after they were charged by the SFA with
bringing the game in to disrepute.
Rangers Chairman Malcolm Murray commented: “We are
disappointed by the decision to convene disciplinary
proceedings. The Club has already provided the SFA with what it regards as a clear and compelling explanation of Mr Green’s
remarks.
“We will defend both Ally McCoist and Charles Green vigorously at the respective hearings.
“In keeping with the principles of free speech we will defend the right for people to express their opinions in good faith.”
http://www.rangers.co.uk/index.php/news/headlines/item/1712-statement
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Clear and compelling? Is he referring to that comment about the French origin of the word ‘bogitry’?
Did they really expect anyone to swallow that balderdash?
As Charlie is running about looking for Sillionaires to put money into THRFC, what proof of financial capability did he show the SFA, or was he even asked?
Scotland Behave says:
August 10, 2012 at 16:30
______________________
O/T just a tip. If you go to Tiny URL, you can convert your very long url into a wee short url. You just paste in your long URL and the site gives you a short url that you can cut and paste to your comment.
http://tinyurl.com/
Excellent analysis Paul and helpful detail about the process relating to the nimmo report. I agree 100% with your point that Mr Green, in convincing the world that the stripping of previous club titles was the punishment most feared by TRFC Ltd, is attempting to sidestep the financial penalties that could be brought to bear, while playing to the galleries of WATP….
What possible explanation could there be for the delay in ally’s charge? chuck’s is 12 days from his slip into medieval french rural dialect.
who’s going to ask?
Anyone? Anyone?
Traynor….
Anyone? Anyone?
Standards of evidence in these tribunals
Paul, i’m inferring from your post that the standards of evidence and/or procedure in these SFA tribunals as chaired by legal experts may be so high that otherwise quite reasonable (in lay terms) decisions may be getting lost, and “justice” (to who’s standards?) may not be getting served.
I could of course be wrong and/or have misread or misunderstood your post, but i got from it that if someone either ignores the charges or unreasonably denies them, them the tribunals working to court standards will find it difficult to come to guilty verdicts. Similarly the definitions of evidence or witness statements are very complex when from a natural justice standpoint things might appear more straightforward and subject to the ‘reasonable’ criteria.
Please tell me i’m wrong. If I’m not, then how did previous tribunals or misconduct committees work? When did such high standards of evidence and procedure kick in? Tell me its not just another ploy to avoid punishing one club. Is it just the way these law lords work? If so, then maybe football decisions should be made by football people.
Yea I can see McCoist and Greene trembling in their boots. Slap on wrist don’t do it again off you go. SFA once again buckle when push comes to shove any bets?
If I’m wrong I will acknowlege.
Can we read anything into Beattie rejecting Hearts, presumably considering and then rejecting The Rangers and then signing for St Johnstone? Are Saints offering the best deal? Has he bought into the project in Perth? Did he just fancy a change?
What do our resident Hearts, Rangers, The Rangers and St Johnstone fans make of it?
paul martin says:
August 10, 2012 at 18:06
What possible explanation could there be for the delay in ally’s charge?
__________________________________________
The delay allows the deception to be completed by SFA by treating the two as working for the same Club. At the time of his offence Ally worked for RFC PLC (IA) while Green committed his offence while owner of Sevco 5088 Ltd or Sevco Scotland Ltd, whichever owned the club/team, although having said that Green may still be in his an unpaid position with RFC (IA).
The movement of the discussion to be around the validity or harshness of stripping of titles has been an enormous PR success by “rangers”, and their Axis allies in the SFA, SPL etc.
It has enabled the sidestepping of the issue of whether Sevco” could truly become Rangers (they couldn’t and should not have been allowed to) or whether they were truly a new club. This was a shaky battleground for the Axis so they deployed the dis-information (or re-imagineering as used earlier) to shift the debate.
The very fact that we are all discussing stripping of titles and Sevco’s virulent objections to it, means we have accepted they are truly “rangers”. See what they did there?
Sevco, despite all the smoke and mirrors and indeed in your face maneouvers, were not, are not and will never be rangers! The club is being liquidated and did not, does not and never will be separate from the PLC that is being wound up.
However, with the full complicity with their Axis allies in the MSM and the “governing authorities” they have won that battle.
Unless of course, the bampots can get behind enemy lines and somehow force a legal ruling in some court that would force Sevco to admit they are a new club. My hopes (albeit small and fading) are that BDO might unravel the sale to Sevco. Not sure of there are other legal actions that might also result in this.
Slightly OT, but a hat tip to the poster earlier for the term Re-Imagineering. very suitable and apt, and up there with Omnishambles as a word to be used when referring to these cheats.
And yes. my lowere case “r” in “rangers” is deliberate! There is no definitive item to allow capitalisation and besides they just don’t deserve that dignity. Am I bitter and twisted. Yes!
ooops I capitised the “r” on the first instance. I will soundly slap myself for that!
On the stripping of titles issue. If Rangers are shown to have played incorrectly registered players, they MUST be stripped of any result gained in any match that the player or players appeared.
Its not a new point but it is worth repeating. Spartans were thrown out of the Cup because they failed to date a form twice. Failed to date a form a second time. They dated it once but were remiss in dating it again. They did not duplicate the entry.
So…IF Rangers even so much as forgot to sign… or date… or submit… the correct paperwork then the outcome must be that every match involving the player or players is awarded to the opposition.
Sorry if that isn’t clear. 😀
Blindsummit says:
August 10, 2012 at 18:23
The very fact that we are all discussing stripping of titles and Sevco’s virulent objections to it, means we have accepted they are truly “rangers”. See what they did there?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
BS
I must confess I am immune to any utterances by Sevoc on anything relating to the Deid Co and all its deid records
`
If I have any concerns its that someone at the SFA will come up with the wheeze that its wrong to punish a deid thing and compare to kicking a tombstone
What Sevco think or say is a complete irrelevance
I should just add my thanks to the Viscount for his recent email on the Spartans/Rangers contrast. It got my dander up again.
OT
On hearing the news that a body has been found in the search for young Tia Sharp, this all seems to pale to insignificance somehow.
My own opinion is that we need to take a step back and remember that in the end, this is all about a game and how some people have cheated. I wonder about the world we live in and at times, despair at the great cruelty that homo sapiens can inflict on one and other, usually by the stronger on the weaker.
Sorry, I just felt that coming out.
Lord Wobbly for an aristocrat of these columns you have just asked one of the most leading questions of our times – I can think of two million reasons why Craig Beattie might have chosen St Johnstone over Rangers. Do you want them in alphabetical order? 🙂