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
Can the blog administrator add a thumbs up thumbs down option for the various blogs, similar to what was available on RTC site?
I think what Chuckie means is that the football creditors have received their 5p in the pound.
Any money that is currently available to pay off historic football debts from RFC(IL) should have been put into the pot of money available to ALL creditors.
The idea that some debts are more deserving than others is heinous.
I understand this is part of the plot to convince the world that the reanimated corpse currently lurching through our third division is the Oldco.
The other creditors, and I specifically include HMRC in this, ought to be raising merry hell about being left to whistle in this manner.
It is another breathtaking example of the complicity and arrogance of the Scottish football authorities that they should demand this partial repayment of debt. They are saying it is more important to keep our coffers topped up (and UEFA of our backs) than it is to pay the police or the ambulance servie or any number of other businesses etc.
The decent Rangers fans know fine well that there ought to be either a full repayment over time, or that there should be a clean break and start from scratch. Anyone with a modicum of self respect gets this.
Bunion says:
August 13, 2012 at 13:25
Was curious to know how UEFA and FIFA regard the current Sevco/SFA shenanigans.
Not sure that the SFA would be responsible for providing the photos for the FIFA website. The editorial control of these pics would be almost non existent, probably chosen for the visual impact. The UEFA website however is very interesting. It has only recently been updated. Rangers FC were listed on the site last week. It takes an informed decision to remove them.
Enfakid says:
August 13, 2012 at 07:55
Mob justice?
Is when you take a snippet of information and irresponsibly
spread it around the internet leading to the ignorant and
uniformed to conjure up conspir@cy theories that have the
potential to damage a persons reputation.
If you do not have the evidence, then keep your mouth shut.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Firstly, that is not mob justice. That is gossiping.
Secondly, that isn’t what I was doing. You suggested that I/we
ask the question. I merely pointed out that we had been asking
for some time and I provided evidence to support that.
Finally, was your last sentence (above) directed at me? If so, I
would refer you to ‘secondly’ above.
Zilch says:
August 13, 2012 at 13:33
=========================
What the SFA have done is effectively created a “Football Creditors” rule in Scotland, where none actually exists. They are ensuring that football clubs are protected, to the detriment of everyone else, including small businesses, emergency services, police authorities and UK taxpayers.
It is an absolute disgrace.
The ironic thing is that they would not have been able to do this with a CVA, neither would Mr Green. What they are trying to achieve is a “debt free” club, at least in footballing terms, while at the same time wiping out anywhere between £50m and £134m in other debts.
Anyone who still believes, in any way shape or form, that those involved had any desire to complete a CVA is delluding themselves. The winding up of Rangers FC PLC was the only reasonable alternative. It was the clear plan all along
If they had their way the new club would also be playing in the SPL this season. We all saw how hard they tried to achieve that, including bullying and attempted blackmail.
Scottish footbal is institutionally corrupt.
Livia Burlando.
Greene makes no ‘utterly bizarre statemenst’. He is a connie guy, his plan is to exit as fast as possible with the largest amount of money he can get from a flip over of Oldco/Newco.
All the bizarre remarks are intended to expedite this exit. He is so reckless with his mouth there can be no other reason.
Just a thought……
If what Charles Green says is accurate, then the £1m place money (that OldCo got for 2nd place) is now being distributed by the SFA to pay football creditors and are SevCo just paying the balance of £50,000.
If this is the case, then SevCo are receiving the benefit of the monies due to NewCo. This benefit is not going to the general body of creditors of OldCo.
We know Duff and Phelps included the SFA membership in the sale of assets for £5.5m. We know the assets of OldCo were not placed for sale on the open market. We know that monies due to football creditors were an impediment to the transfer of the membership.
In agreeing to allow the SFA to so distribute the £1m place money to pay football creditors in full (leaving SevCo to pay a small balance), have Duff and Phelps favoured a minority of creditors over the general body of creditors?
Is it Lord Hodge, BDO or creditors (such as HMRC) who should be asking these questions?
Looks like Leckie was right 15 years ago about how Murrays spending would be their downfall, hold on a minute….
Leckie in 1997
“All I can say is, massive respect is due to Rangers – and Muz in particular – for keeping Brian Laudrup in the game.
And before all you Celtic fans – including the one standing over me with a
rolling pin as I write this – start giving it the there-ye-go-ah-always-
knew-he-was-wanna-them paranoia, remember one thing.
Rangers also beat you when Laudrup WASN’T playing.
This time last week I was all set to write a piece on how they had finally,
eventually, taken the leap forward they’ve threatened for so long; but then
the news broke that their greatest asset was leaving.
Suddenly all the summer’s advances – the arrival of a foreign coach, the
signing of Thern and two top-drawer defenders, the Defenders lost their
sheen.
You wondered just what a downer there would be on the day their Great Dane
went walkies for good.
A couple of seasons ago, last summer even, you wouldn’t have bet tuppence on
Muz being able to talk the boy round. But something has happened at Ibrox,
something you can’t put your finger on, which seems to have propelled them
into a different orbit.
And so, as Ajax sat back waiting with a spacecake and an Oranjeboom and
Fergie came out gloating that the player was his, Muz quietly got down to
the business of making Laudrup stay.
Were I a Celtic man, I would be so afraid. No manager, no sign of a manager,
two biggest names threatening to do a bunk, no sign of new blood, season
ticket holders in a major huff.
Call me picky, but things do not look good. And hell mend them.
I cannot believe how quickly and how far Fergus McCann has allowed things to
slip, especially after Tommy Burns took them so close.
It is easy to say now that Burns was a failure, but what is nearer to the
truth is that he was a very good manager with the wrong club.
The closer he got to toppling Rangers, the more his emotional attachment to
Celtic overtook the rational thinking his job required.
Others would disagree, but I reckon Burns will go on to be a huge success
elsewhere, starting in King Kenny’s bootroom at the Toon.
What is not up for argument, though, is that Celtic are in a far worse state
without him than they were with him. Rangers are leaving them further and
further behind with every passing day and there is no white smoke from the
Parkhead chimney to signal a comeback.
The Ibrox men are, I reckon, one more signing away from finally leaving
their greatest rivals – and, therefore, the rest of us – so far behind them
they will be no more than a dancing dot on the horizon.
Who is that signing? I’d go for Batistuta – though Muz says no – but whoever
they end up with he will be big time and he will be here soon.
It’s enough to make any Celtic fan hide behind the couch. Sorry? Oh, you
already are.”
From kds via cqn
The more I think about the delay in starting the transfer ban, the more I think that there is only one possible reason. Without the certainty that TRFC will win div 3, the more of a certainty that they would have gone into administration during the season. The SFA must have known this and in order to prevent this, delayed the ban in order for TRFC to get players in who could guarantee a league win.
TRFC had ample players on their books to ensure that their would have been a competitive div 3, but could not guarantee that they would be successful.
Just another example IMO of the corrupt nature of what has taken place in this saga.
I have tried to think of any other reason why their would be a delay on the ban, but cannot come up with anything else.
As regards outstanding “football” debts, I think the balance of Hearts debts weren’t yet due, so maybe that’s a reason for any discrepancy.
What I do think is interesting, and gets to the heart of RTC’s and this blog, is that Scotland apparently doesn’t have a football creditor rule in the same way Ingerlund does, so there is nothing to say that foobtall debts take precedence over any other. Living down here, I have mentuioned EBTs and a number fo guys are like “no, that’s all sorted now” but there have been no news reports ince 9 clubs were thoughts to be getting investigated by HMRC.
Perhaps this is why What Was Rangers was chosen as a test case – if HMRC can set a precedent on football EBTs (or similar structure), getting a firm result in HMRC’s favour, perhaps that would then supercede any gentleman’s agreement vis a vis “football debts” in the courts. That’d be enought to scare the EPL clubs into paying up or at least putting a payment schedule in place….
Anyone with a legal background care to comment?
Ranchofranco
Call me paranoid, but….
http://www.scottishreview.net/AlasdairMcKillop249.shtml
These guy’s are trading hugs and kisses and know we know it, but care not. I remember when it was all the rage to be conspiracy theorists. They’ve even taken that from us.
Good morning Enfakid 😀
Enjoyed the football on Saturday and a 1-1 draw with Motherwell was a fair outcome. One player that stood out was the St Johnstone goalscorer Murray Davidson, a combatitive midfielder with a “great engine”. He scored a determined equalising goal with a header. He is now the team captain at Saints and was great in our two European games too and is very much on form. He was in the squad for Scotland against Brazil but has yet to start for his country. So if you hear of a combatitive, Scottish midfielder getting called into the Scotland squad, do let me know its bound to be Murray.
Unless one of the more cyncial among you think a Sevco player might fit the description. 🙁
the leckie thing is a parody account from tinsoldier not to be taken seriously ,the guy is a laugh a minute lol,
Good Afternoon.
With regards to Neill McCann, his comments, and his contractual position…. I am afraid that he, and indeed, many others are deluded with regard to the up and coming enquiry
One thing to note, is that the SPL investigation is not, in fact, into whether or not there were dual contracts, but rather whether payments were in fact made to Rangers players “outwith contract”.
The Following sentence is taken from the SPL’s own website following on their receipt of the original Harper McLead report:
“The SPL Board heard a report from its solicitors following the investigation into payments to, or for the benefit of, players allegedly made by Rangers FC outside of contract.”
Now that is interesting because from that it would appear that whoever turns up to defend the allegations investigated will have to explain any payments to players which appear outwith the terms of whatever was in fact registered with the SPL in terms of the employment of any player– and of course it is to be presumed that what was registered with the SPL would be identical to whatever was lodged with the SFA as part of the annual return submitted each June and the documents required for the annual Licence and the SFA Audit.
So the SPL will not investigate if these payments were legal, if the EBT was legal or administered properly, if Rangers PLC disclosed the EBT’s in their accounts, or anything else.
They will simply ask ” Were any of the players mentioned paid anything, any sum of money at all, over and above the sums stipulated in the contracts of employment submitted by Rangers and registered with the SPL?”
Further they will ask:
” Were any of the players Registered by Rangers PLC paid any sum of money by anyone other than Rangers PLC?”. It doesn’t matter if it was a Rangers EBT, it doesn’t matter if it was a legal EBT, an Illegal EBT, or anything else!
It doesn’t matter if those payments were termed a loan, a gift, a present, a lottery win, a free stake for a bet or a reward for finding someone’s lost dog.
The EBT is an independent legal body– and not the Employer in terms of any contract, and so if they paid the players anything at all in relation to their playing football then it is “outwith contract”—– end of story.
SDM and anyone else can say that these payments were loans– but the example provided by RTC re Gavin Rae shows that whatever the payments were– they were payments by a third party to Gavin Rae in connection with his playing football for Rangers FC– appearance bonuses and that type of thing cannot be anything else! Same goes for McCann.
However, for me the greatest question of all will be how any tribunal treats Servco— because they were not a party to any such contracts, nor were party to any such payments, nor any discussions or arrangements in relation to such payments. So– how can they comment on any of these payments contractual or otherwise?
The only people who can actually comment on the payments are those who made the payments, those who received the payments and of course those who were party to the Registered Contracts.
One of them has of course made a public statement– making it clear that the payments were in fact a loan– still a payment outwith any contract of employment– but I wonder how many players will sing along with that particular song?
And I wonder when any journalist will ask any player what they think about Sir David Murray releasing a statement to the biggest News gathering agency in the world- Associated Press- which stipulates quite clearly that all of these payments have to be repaid with interest.
The Administrators failed to register the name change of RFC Ltd to TRFC Ltd of 30th July with SFA. Consequently the membership transfer is between two differently named clubs. You would think that with all their switcheroo experience they would have thought about that. Should have checked with David Grier and Craig Whyte. Still no answer to the question why would Craig Whyte vote for a name change at EGM if he had no material interest in the outcome?
Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
August 13, 2012 at 14:25
=======================
Rangers did not provide loans.
Rangers made payments into sub trusts for the players benefit. Those payments were not returnable as far as I am aware, therefore not loans.
The trustees of the EBT then, at their discretion, made the loans, using the money paid into the sub-trust.
It is important to bear in mind that the player could have the money from the sub-trust if they wanted it. However tax would fall due at that time. So, provided they were willing to pay the tax like the rest of us then they could collect the money Rangers had paid them, rather than take is as a loan.
This talk of loans rather than payments is clear obfuscation (yes, that was deliberate).
I know folks are talking about the quantum CG has lodged with SFA. Apologies if this has been covered before (I’m on my mobile and it’s not immediately obvious) but has anyone else noticed the typo in the print version of the Chris Roberts DR article? He mentions the figure of £500,00 which may mean £50,000 in respect of footballing debts paid by CG to the SFA (as has been reported on Sporting Life website above) or perhaps he meant £500,000. I mean this kind of typo can shirley only be a mistake rather than deliberate obfuscation…
Anyway, contacted Chris via Twitter for him to clarify. Interesting in the article that there is no mention of him then immediately contacting the SFA to verify this ie what particular debts or fines CG was referring to as being cleared?
Philip Jose Farmer: i think I can help on a couple of points you make.
1. Most EBT’s include former employees under the potential beneficiaries (in some cases this can allow payments to pensioners). Souness could have received the payment as a former employee. I recall, however, that the timing of the payment coincided with a player being transferred between Rangers and Blackburn (then managed by Souness). Might be coincidence, might not.
2. You are correct that the payments made by Rangers were not returnable. The players probably could not have asked for “straight” payments rather than loans (even if they, or their agents, understood what was happening). This would be at the discretion of the trustees, who will generally do approximately what club management tells them to do (the “approximately” bit is to make them look independent). The key issue on these payments, though, is whether they were made under the terms of a legal contract.
Bunion says:
August 13, 2012 at 13:25
Was curious to know how UEFA and FIFA regard the current Sevco/SFA shenanigans.
UEFA = http://www.uefa.com/teamsandplayers/index.html.
There is no senior mens football team called Rangers, Glasgow Rangers or even The Rangers listed anywhere. Only listed Rangers team is Rangers LFC (the ladies team).
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Does this mean that in 3yrs time if Newco Sevco manage to qualify for any UEFA competition they will start with a zero coefficient below Ranger`s FC of the Andorra League?
Andorran Premier Division
Sant Julià
6-0
Rànger’s
Rànger’s
1-4
Principat
Lusitans
6-0
Rànger’s
Rànger’s
0-3
Engordany
UE Santa Coloma
10-0
Rànger’s
Rànger’s
1-3
Inter Escaldes
FC Santa Coloma
10-0
Rànger’s
Rànger’s
0-5
Sant Julià
Principat
4-1
Rànger’s
Rànger’s
2-5
Lusitans
Engordany
3-0
Rànger’s
Rànger’s
0-5
UE Santa Coloma
Extremenya
0-2 Rànger’s
Andorran Cup,
Rànger’s
0-7 FC Santa Coloma
FC Santa Coloma
10-0 Rànger’s
Aggregate: 17-0
@the young chevalier
According to what has been reported Whyte sold his shares (the ones owned by group presumably) to green for £2 so he would not have had any say in the name change vote what will be interesting will be how the 5.5m that was presumably released from escrow to the duffs was divvied up
Is this the £500,000 CG is referring to?
=================================
Domaine Jessiaume says:
August 6, 2012 at 11:45
10 0 Rate This
Two unrelated bits of information:-
Re. the £500,000 being paid by the English FA to the SFA in respect of the Steve Davis “transfer”; and to the deduction of £196,000 by the SFA before the balance is passed to Charles Green.
Some posters questioned the sum of £196,000 and how it was computed. So, it is made up as follows:-
1. £10,000 – fine imposed on RFC for breach of Rule 2 of the Judicial Panel protocol.
2. £50,000 – fine imposed on RFC for breach of Rule 14.
3. £100,000 – fine imposed for breach of Rule 66.
4. £5,000 for breach of Rule 73
5. £31,063.40 – expenses of Judicial Review hearing.
Total sum to be deducted by the SFA £196,063.40.
======================================
If so, then he got the balance of £304,000 or so paid to Sevco by the SFA under the 5 way agreement and none of the football debts are paid.
ttc,
Whyte only agreed to sell his shares, and it was dependent on a CVA being accepted. He remains the majority shareholder in RFC(IA) soon to be RFC(IL) then RFC(RIP)
The dirty 4/5 dozen or so recipients of EBTs must be sh*tting a really large brick ( brick house )
I myself was once ‘interviewed’ by HMRC regarding a tax avoidance scheme which after many months months of investigation was deemed perfectly legal and acceptable. The interminable period in between was sheer Hell. ( highway to Hell). The doubts the potential for massive penalties the family and friends and work collegues embarrassment etc (this is the End)
Thankfully I had expert legal and accounting advice – NO DODGY SIDE LETTER and everything was paid in full that required to be.( no debt)
These dodoRangers employees had side letters specifically stating that these “loans” payments that contributed to their wages would never requiring to be repaid ie they were actually additional income. Tax and NI due then. ( cos I’m the taxman)
David( I’ve lied so Ive started) claims they were loans only. Is there a statute of limitation on loans David? Just asking. Cos I’m willing to bet that not one solitary dime has been paid back from ANY of these “loans”. And if not, you lie! (liar liar)
Correct me if I’m wrong David.( sorry seems to be the hardest word eh?)
SANDY JARDINE SPEAKS P**H SHOCK!
Can I recommend the latest podcast from “Beyond The Pitch” easily accessed from itunes etc.
Special guest one Mr Sandy Jardine who continues to rewrite history on a site that is usually a serious contributor to world football issues.
Apparently it’s all CW’s fault, before he arrived the club were successfully “downsizing” and had reduced the debt etc etc. Nobody else at the club – managers,staff,players etc. knew about anything that CW did.
The SFA/SPL are to blame for their lack of proper governance and fit and propoer checks, they are to blame for CW being allowed to take over?
Absolutely no mention of SDM in his 20 minute ramble and several mentions of Rangers having gone into admin and now successfully come out of this? Not one mention of the L word.
And just for good measure Rangers are now “rebuilding and moving forward”.
P.s. EBT,s are legal and anyway any investigation will be resisted as there is no case to answer!
Dissapointed that this podcast which is listened to all over the world allowed him to promote the usual sham and only after he left did the two presenters get the boot in.
Anyway if you can be bothered with his mantra it’s worth a listen.
Domaine Jessiaume says:
August 13, 2012 at 15:24
The SFA is just soooooooooooooo utterly corrupt.
jammy dodger says:
August 13, 2012 at 08:56
thewestlight says:
August 13, 2012 at 08:36
Long Time Lurker says:
August 13, 2012 at 07:50
The nuclear button is an option of last resort – a deterrant
…………………………………………………………………………………………
Do you think it is working?
===================
I think an awful lot of people who normally have plenty to say for themselves are keeping it well zipped, probably for the first time in their lives. Walter Smith, anyone? Mr Souness? Dave King? Our beloved SFA president? and more besides.
I wonder why? I don’t know, but I’m pretty sure Charles Green does, and he’s using that knowledge very skilfully, so far as I can see.
________________________________________________________________________
So, are you saying Charles Green, has the nuclear info? If so, it doesn’t seem to be hindering his new club game plan.
Larsson7 says:
August 13, 2012 at 15:30
============================
Duff & Phelps, BDO and Lord Hodge are all going to be very surprised when they learn that Rangers have successfully exited administratin. Given that one is still the administrator, one is the liquidator who will eventually wind them up and one is the High Court Judge who instructed that they were not to exit administration until he had received a report with regard a potential conflict of interest for Duff & Phelps. Specifically the fact that they had acted for Craig Whyte when he bought the business and were also acting for him in the administration. Oh and that pesky email in which Mr Whyte discussed said administration with Duff & Phelps months before it actually happened.
Philip José Farmer says: August 13, 2012 at 14:42
Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says: August 13, 2012 at 14:25
=====================
BRTH – I agree that the issue being investigated is payment to players outside their contract as lodged with the SPL & SFA. However I have to agree with PJF on his comment re RFC not providing loans.
To my mind, the whole issue of third party payments, is mis-represented and thus misunderstood by some. RFC made payments into an EBT for the benefit of individual players and others. A number of people seem to interpret the players having receiving benefit from the trust as a third party payment, against the rules of the SPL and SFA. I believe that interpretation is wrong. The money has come from RFC (the employer) for the benefit of the player and no-one else.
Being pedantic about it, if a club makes a payment (of wages) into a Bank of Scotland account in the name of the player, then the player withdraws the money from the account, does it become a third pary payment from BoS to the player. Of course not.
Similarly if a club makes payment into a pension fund, an ISA, or or other investment fund on behalf of the player then it is not a third party payment when the player finally receives the benefit.
The EBT investigations have two independent strands. 1) by the FTT, who have been asked to establish whether or not tax should have been paid (HMRC themselves already believe that tax was due), and 2) by the footballing authorities seeking to establish if undisclosed payments for footballing activities were made (most likely via the EBT route). The tax liability or otherwise of any payment made via EBT is of no consequence to the footballing authorities.
There is no third party payment issue.
Green has now clarified the position on debts due to Scottish Clubs of TRFC website. Reading between the lines, I’m pretty sure that the funds held over by SPL were used in part to pay the debts and that TRFC Ltd have only topped up the difference.
The outstanding amount to Hearts is now £300K, as £500K was due to be paid last month.
When I indicated on here that I wouldn’t attend the Australia friendly- and that was before the Ian Black announcement -, someone (sorry, can’t recall who) advised that I should let the SFA know WHY. I emailed them today. I also emailed the Hootsman (to whom I subscribe until it won’t be renewed in 2 months!) to ask if they would report the reasons for any low attendance accurately, if it comes to pass.
I am writing for the sake of clarity to let you know of my intention NOT to attend the upcoming Scotland – Australia friendly. I believe there are many, many other Scotland fans who, likewise, will not be attending though I have no influence over that.
If and when the turnout is lower than anticipated – even for a friendly – I hope you will recognise that for what it is. It is not due to fans losing interest in their country’s matches; it is not because the game is being played in Edinburgh rather than Glasgow; nor is it purely due to the current economic climate. For many football fans in Scotland, the sole reason for non-attendance is to lodge a protest at how the SFA and other bodies have handled the Newco affair.
There has been much talk across various fansites of boycotting SPL/SFL games, but in the main fans took the view that doing so would a) harm the club they loved rather than the bodies they wanted to harm and b) play into the hands of both the Newco and those cheating to have them installed in SFL3 (i.e. the ‘See, we told you the game would die without Rangers’ attitude).
As a result, this is the first opportunity for those disenfranchised fans to demonstrate their unhappiness at the rule-breaking that has allowed a new club to leapfrog others into the SFL.
I would normally also attend the U-21 international at East End Park this week, as I have done in the past. Regrettably, although I want to support my country, I cannot support the governing bodies that promoted and allowed such blatant cheating to take place.
jamesdar says:
August 13, 2012 at 15:07
0 0 i
Rate This
Philip Jose Farmer: i think I can help on a couple of points you make.
1. Most EBT’s include former employees under the potential beneficiaries (in some cases this can allow payments to pensioners). Souness could have received the payment as a former employee. I recall, however, that the timing of the payment coincided with a player being transferred between Rangers and Blackburn (then managed by Souness). Might be coincidence, might not.
2. You are correct that the payments made by Rangers were not returnable. The players probably could not have asked for “straight” payments rather than loans (even if they, or their agents, understood what was happening). This would be at the discretion of the trustees, who will generally do approximately what club management tells them to do (the “approximately” bit is to make them look independent). The key issue on these payments, though, is whether they were made under the terms of a legal contract.
==========================
Thank you for the first part. I thought someone actually had to be an employee for at least part of the time that the EBT operated in order for them to benefit from it. So in essence MIH paid money into a sub trust long after Mr Souness had left the club, then the trustee gave him a “loan”, when he was actually employed by another football club. It’s lucky the trustees took the independent decision to approve that loan.
As I understand it the beneficiary in an EBT can get the money from their sub-trust. However as it then becomes a payment rather than a loan they have to pay the tax at that stage. That would defeat the purpose of the whole charade. Given that they had already been told they would get the loans whenever they wanted and would never have to repay them then why bother giving half of your money to the Government.
“RANGERS have settled all debts due to Scottish football clubs. The debts were outstanding from the time the Club went into administration.
Heart of Midlothian Football Club is due a further payment from Rangers in July next year and this will be paid when it falls due.
Charles Green, Rangers Chief Executive, said: “As of now, Rangers do not owe other Scottish clubs a penny.”
That’s an interesting way to spin it. We don’t owe anyone anything. Other than the money we owe but aren’t due to pay just yet.
On that thinking I am debt free, until the end of the month when my mortgage is due to be paid.
I should add re the outstanding balance due to Hearts, that the timing was under the original staged payment agreed between RFC(IA) and Hearts for the transfer of Wallace.
When RFC(IA) actually went into administration the full balance became payable immediately (the £800K), so technically Hearts could have requested full payment now, rather than revert to the original schedule of payments.
PJF & Easy Jambo
I think we are at cross purposes. Clearly the money paid out by Rangers PLC to the trust is not refundable and the idea ( written or otherwise ) that the money from the trust to the player is refundable is no more than a ruse– ar at least it is meant to be on paper– but not according to SDM.
What I am getting at is that the investigation was into payments outwith contract in connection with playing football. Further the rules do not allow 3rd party contracts.
Accordingly, even a loan from a 3rd party connected to appearances or length of service etc is struck at by the rules. A loan on a house, or a car or any old thing you want could work– but a loan– a payment of a loan if you like– where the money goes from nominal lender to player– based on the players performance on the football field is “outwith contract”.
Accordingly all the SPL need do is to show that Player A received £x from Co C ( irrespective of it being a loan or anything else ) in connection with that player playing football. If that happened and it is not covered by the SPL registered contract then there is a breach– no matter which way it is dressed up.
Justice !
alex thomson@alextomo
avid Leggat has been fined £1000 ( the maximum allowable) and suspended from the union for writing threatening material about me.
Further tweets from AT
Curious that Strathclyde police force failed to act upon the same obvious evidence.
I am told Mr Leggat has resigned from the NUJ.
easyJambo says:
August 13, 2012 at 16:28
2 0 Rate This
Justice !
alex thomson@alextomo
avid Leggat has been fined £1000 ( the maximum allowable) and suspended from the union for writing threatening material about me.
…and was mr leggats response to the fine similar to that of mr whytes- or did he pay it?
why did sky announce they would only strike a t.v deal with the spl and werent interested in a separate deal involving div3 sevco and sfl. could it be they were informed of an upcoming spl2 attempt for next season and felt no need to sign up for a fantasy 3 year march to spl by sevco.
Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says: August 13, 2012 at 16:24
==========================
I don’t think we are really at cross purposes. The simple issue at stake is whether or not money paid into the EBTs was contractual. HMRC beleive it was and is therefore taxable. If the footballing authorities establish that it was both contactual and related to footballing activities, but not disclosed to them, then it is a breach of their rules.
The key for both the FTT and the footballing authorities will be to show that the purpose of the series of transactions from club to EBT to player constituated a contractual reward for playing football. The EBT loan process is simply there as a means to reduce tax liability. I think that it will be the end to end purpose of the transactions that will prove RFC(IA)’s and SDM’s undoing,
Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
August 13, 2012 at 16:24
——————————-
I understand what you are saying, but would argue that the trust and the trustees are not third parties in the sense the regulation is aimed at. They do not pay the player (even as loans) they merely authorise payment of monies supplied by the club.
If anything I would argue that it is more similar to a disbursement than a third party payment. Or using easyjambo’s analogy it is similar to a pension. A company will administer the pension and make the monthly payments. However they aren’t really paying the money they are passing on money suppled for that purpose.
The bottom line however is much simpler than any of this as I understand it. Were the Scottish footballing authorities notified of these payments (and they definitely were payments from MIH / Rangers’ perspective) in the appropriate manner and at the appropriate time. If not then the rule is breached and the player was ineligible.
alex thomson @alextomo
Curious that Strathclyde police force failed to act upon the same obvious evidence.
Expand
Reply Retweet Favorite
18m scott mc @sonicscott1
@alextomo you will find that Strathclyde Police are a Law unto Themselves !
Expand
Reply Retweet Favorite
12m alex thomson @alextomo
@sonicscott1 the conduct of Strathclyde Police over this was shameful, quite possibly corrupt. I will say no more – for now.
Hide conversation
Reply Retweet Favorite
Domaine Jessiaume says:
August 13, 2012 at 15:24
Is this the £500,000 CG is referring to?
=================================
Domaine Jessiaume says:
August 6, 2012 at 11:45
10 0 Rate This
Two unrelated bits of information:-
Re. the £500,000 being paid by the English FA to the SFA in respect of the Steve Davis “transfer”; and to the deduction of £196,000 by the SFA before the balance is passed to Charles Green.
**************
This is the the 3rd time you have posted that Southampton paid a substantial fee for Davies – where is your source?
Southampton deny they paid anything other than a nominal fee – backed up by Southanpton press releases and their website.
The only people saying there was more than a nominal amount was a “Records Sports Understands” exclusive that started at 800K, then 700K now 500K. Other than that non story there is no evidence of any fee for Davies paid from Southampton.
If there is please share – otherwise please stop repeating DR nonsense as facts….
Glad to hear of NUJ action in relation to AT’s spot of bother from one of our country’s less able citizens.
Let us hope that Strathclyde’s finest are thorough and intrepid in relation to their ongoing enquiries of RFC (IA)
To a certain extent who made the payments is almost irrelevant
The crux of the matter is, were payments made to players for playing football, over and above those shown in the contracts lodged with the authorities
From what we know, this is indeed the case, and therefore RFC (IA) or whoever are guilty as charged
Re the Scottish football debts .
If any of the 2nd place prize money from the SPL has been used to pay any of these debts then 2012 fc have paid very little (if anything )
It is clear that ,had CW paid the PAYE/NIC due ragers will have never saw the season out and would never have been in a position to receive any prize money .
IMO this money should have been withheld as soon as the CW running of the club came to light ,as it is just another form of financial doping and just another sorry episode in this whole debacle .
Re Strathclyde Police
Does anyone know the final amount payable when ragers went into admin ,I seem to recall a police spokesman saying that they would only police ragers games when the previous games bill was settled ,this was when the outstanding bill stood at £52,000.
If the final bill was higher maybe AT would like to hear who authorised any further policing
Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
August 13, 2012 at 16:24
I think I had a run in regarding the third party issue on the RTC site a while back.
As far as I can see the HMRC do not consider the EBT loan to be from a third party as the payment into the trust came from the employer.
“Loan made by a third party – employee benefit trust
It is not uncommon for a third party, such as an employee benefit trust (EBT), to make a loan to a beneficiary who is also an employee of the employer which is associated with the EBT. It is sometimes suggested that the loan is not an “employment-related loan” (EIM26113) because the definition of that term does not include a loan provided by a third party.
Whilst it is true that the definition includes no reference to a third party loan provider, HMRC does not accept that the loan is not an employment-related loan. The definition of “employment-related loan” includes a loan made by an employee’s employer. As “making” a loan includes “in any way facilitating” a loan, if the employer provides the money to fund the EBT, the employer is regarded as making the loan.
Consequently for the purposes of the loan benefit rules, the EBT is ignored and the loan is treated as made directly by the employer to the employee. It follows that the loan is an employment-related loan.”
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/eimanual/eim26110.htm
Now the footballing authorities may take a different view as to whether or not the payment is coming from a third party but then why would they go against the guidance of ‘best practice’ from the HMRC?
Therefore it is most likely we can rule out the oldco being done for unauthorised payments from a third party as the HMRC says that the money coming out of the EBT is an employment related loan.
The question is therefore how the footballilng authorities view the loan from the EBT.
The HMRC appear to say they are employment related and we know that since 2008 the FIFA minimum requirements on player contracts must detail :-
a) Salary
b) Other financial benefits
c) Other benefits (Non financial such as car, accommodation etc)
However that is only from 2008. What were the FIFA requirements before then and what were the SPL/SFA requirements from 2001 onwards?
Therefore the questions are
1 Did loans, especially those that do not appear to need to be paid back, need to be detailed on the players contracts as per the requirements at the time the loans were made?
2. Are the loans related to performance and if so should they be treated as contractural payments by the footballing authorities?
The FTT will most likely come out and confirm that they believe the loans were actually contractural payments, invariably related to apperances and performance, that should have been subject to tax.
That should give some guidance to the SPL inquiry but that doesn’t mean that the footballing authorities will not say that these were merely loans and there is nothing in the football rules current or past that these have to be detailed on players contracts.
I think that is where SDM is looking for wriggle room by saying the loans still require to be repaid.
As RTC has confirmed the existance of side letters and the like appear to have them banged to rights with the HMRC/FTT but I still fear given the level of bending over backwards shown to date that this does not leave it cut and dry with the footballing authorities.
Still more than happy for someone to confirm what the SPL /SFA rules were in 2001 to put my mind at rest.
Isnt it a bit odd that the only club to date (Southhampton–Davis) who agreed to pay RFC(IA) a transfer fee did so under an arrangement with the FA and SFA ?
In fact
Is there a possibilty that the SPL/ SFA smoothed the way for this to happen and will use the same route for other football debts owed by RFC(IA) to be paid from “transfers” with no money passing through Sevco books?
If so
This arrangement provides a legal mechanism for Sevco to argue to HMRC that it did not agree to nor did it pay any football debts of RFC(IA)
It also allows D&P to argue to BDO that RFC(IA) has not favoured football Creditors over other Creditors
If this is true there will be evidence of it somewhere in the SFA records
Either CG agreed in writing to pay these debts or he is lying and has simply agreed verbally for transfer fees up to a fixed ceiling to be paid direct to the SFA
Also
This would imply that the SFA are illegally conniving with Green to prevent players from walking and illegally conniving with D&P to prevent RFC(IA) being accused of treating football Creditors differently from other Creditors
Goosy – where is the evidence “that the only club to date” paid a fee? Southampton deny it!
Josef Goebells – if you tell a lie often enought it will become the truth.
MSM are doign a great job here
jockybhoy says:
August 13, 2012 at 10:09
25 0 Rate This
Enfakid says: August 13, 2012 at 07:55
Mob justice?
Is when you take a snippet of information and irresponsibly
spread it around the internet leading to the ignorant and
uniformed to conjure up conspiracy theories that have the
potential to damage a persons reputation….If you do not have the evidence, then keep your mouth shut.
—————
Lord Wobbly is more than capable of looking after himself, but if I may jump in here… the proverbial “smoking gun” seems to be £30k in an EBT from a football club he left many years previously but he had done business with more recently. This information, backed by evidence, was put in the public domain by the BBC along with their suggestion (not mine) that this may have been linked with transfers – “Mr Souness declined to respond to BBC Scotland’s allegations”. RTC and now this website has discussed it, quite responsibly I think, in that context.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jockybhoy. According to our young friend, we are spreading malicious gossip about Mr Souness. Enfakid, meanwhile, seems to think it is acceptable to describe Neil Lennon as a vicious thug. It must be that old thing about rules only applying to some folks.
For the sake of rpetition here is points I made before at the time of the Southapton signing of Davies
(1) The 800K (then 700K then 500K) all came from a “Record Sports understands” exclusive that was copied into other papers.
(2) Southampton denied they paid anything more than a nominal amount – same as Coventry did for Fleck – as they wanted Davis to concentrate on his new club as they ned to get off ot a roaring start in the EPL
(3) The player needed also to be mindful of what happened to Naismith and Whittaker – especially since he and his family are in Norn Iron
(4) Southampton fans questioned the club why they paid anything if they could get him for free.
(5) CG needed to show he had money coming in – not from Ticketus – but from another source
(6) CG needed ST sales to get moving – this fee woudl show he had the moeny to last through the summer.
(7) Southampton have a limited budget but are still trying to sign players – seems their funds have not dried up.
(8) Helsingborgs confirm they paid no fee for Bedoya – who unlike Davies was suppsoed to have TUPE’d over to Sevco.
That last one is much more interesting to me!
ExiledCelt says:
August 13, 2012 at 16:57
4 0 Rate This
Domaine Jessiaume says:
August 13, 2012 at 15:24
Is this the £500,000 CG is referring to?
=================================
Domaine Jessiaume says:
August 6, 2012 at 11:45
10 0 Rate This
Two unrelated bits of information:-
Re. the £500,000 being paid by the English FA to the SFA in respect of the Steve Davis “transfer”; and to the deduction of £196,000 by the SFA before the balance is passed to Charles Green.
**************
This is the the 3rd time you have posted that Southampton paid a substantial fee for Davies – where is your source?
Southampton deny they paid anything other than a nominal fee – backed up by Southanpton press releases and their website.
The only people saying there was more than a nominal amount was a “Records Sports Understands” exclusive that started at 800K, then 700K now 500K. Other than that non story there is no evidence of any fee for Davies paid from Southampton.
If there is please share – otherwise please stop repeating DR nonsense as facts….
=====================================
I have gone into the “source” issue previously ad longum much to the boredom of all, I suspect.
There was a payment of £500,000 which was made by Southampton via the English FA to the SFA and it was spelt out in detail in the five way agreement that the fines would be paid from this and the balance remitted to Sevco. I have broken down what exactly was being deducted by the SFA and what was being passed to Sevco.
The £500,000 was not used to pay football debts, although the prize money due to RFC(IA) for coming second may have been applied in this way. This strikes me as unlawful however, and beyond the gift of Charles Green, but that may just be another thing for BDO to unpick.
I do not read the Daily Record. I posted this once, then gave the breakdown of the sums being deducted by SFA as requested by other posters and this morning read that CG was saying £500,000 had been applied to football debts and posted the same info saying that it was not to be applied to football as per the 5 way agreement.
I have also pointed out that the five way agreement gave no deadline for payment of the football debts and as a consequence of the lack of deadline, also failed to stipulate any penalties for non-payment.
I am not sure if the football debts have been paid or not. The prize money may have been used for this, but I doubt the other creditors would be too happy.
jockybhoy says:
August 13, 2012 at 10:09
25 0 Rate This
Enfakid says: August 13, 2012 at 07:55
Mob justice?
Is when you take a snippet of information and irresponsibly
spread it around the internet leading to the ignorant and
uniformed to conjure up conspir@cy theories that have the
potential to damage a persons reputation….If you do not have the evidence, then keep your mouth shut.
—————
Lord Wobbly is more than capable of looking after himself, but if I may jump in here… the proverbial “smoking gun” seems to be £30k in an EBT from a football club he left many years previously but he had done business with more recently. This information, backed by evidence, was put in the public domain by the BBC along with their suggestion (not mine) that this may have been linked with transfers – “Mr Souness declined to respond to BBC Scotland’s allegations”. RTC and now this website has discussed it, quite responsibly I think, in that context.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jockybhoy. According to our young friend, we are spreading
malicious gossip about Mr Souness. Enfakid, meanwhile, seems to think it is acceptable to describe Neil Lennon as a vicious thug. It must be that old thing about rules only applying to some folks.
Spoke to a Hull City fan today who informed me that Sone Aluko, who remember paid his own way to play for RFC (ia) was prevented from playing in a cup tie for his new club at the weekend due to his registration being held up… So its ok for the signed trialists to play up here in Cup matches but due to SEVCO and their collusion with SFA they are preventing this guy from continuing his career…. another shameful / shameless episode in the SEVCO saga
DJ – the article about English FA paying Southamptons money had no one from English FA nor Southampton nor SFA confirming it. Again – paper talk,
ExiledCelt – the five way agreement devoted clauses to this issue in detail, including which fines would be paid from the proceeds. I suppose this means the deal for Davis was £500,000 as that is what the agreement says.
You can choose to believe or not but the agreement says what I have previously posted. promise.
From July 21st
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/fifa-tell-newco-rangers-theyre-1167299
FIFA last night said Rangers won’t get a penny for stars who quit Ibrox – but they could land an £800,000 windfall for Steven Davis.
Ibrox chief executive Charles Green challenged the decisions of Davis, Steven Naismith, Jamie Ness, Kyle Lafferty and Steven Whittaker to walk away from the Glasgow club this summer.
They all rejected the transfer of their contracts to a newco and negotiated deals elsewhere. Naismith joined Everton, Lafferty signed for Sion, Ness for Stoke City and Whittaker for Norwich.
But FIFA have ruled Green is due nothing for any of them, with Ness’s switch to Stoke the first to be given the OK last night by the game’s governing body.
The SFA later confirmed provisional clearance has also been granted to Lafferty, Whittaker and Naismith. PFA Scotland solicitor, Margaret Gribbon, said: “Ness now has provisional clearance from FIFA and I expect all other applications before them to take the same course.”
Davis also expected to join Southampton for free but Record Sport understands a deal has been struck between Green and the English side that will see Rangers receive around £800,000 for the Northern Ireland captain.
Rangers announced on Saturday morning a deal had been agreed with Southampton for skipper Davis.
Green said on the club’s official website: “I am delighted that we have agreed terms over the transfer of Steven Davis.
“Southampton have acted in good faith during the process. We wish them every success and they have signed a player who will undoubtedly make a great contribution to their club – just as he did at Ibrox.”
That will come as a huge boost to the Ibrox chief and boss Ally McCoist as they look to rebuild their squad ahead of the new season, which they will start in the SFL Third Division
Domaine Jessiaume says:
August 13, 2012 at 18:08
ExiledCelt – the five way agreement devoted clauses to this issue in detail, including which fines would be paid from the proceeds. I suppose this means the deal for Davis was £500,000 as that is what the agreement says.
You can choose to believe or not but the agreement says what I have previously posted. promise.
************
Please post the source of the agreement
The source is the agreement, or the agreement is the source.
Take it or leave it mate.
DJ – the source is the agreement – fine – show me the source – I am an adult – I can read it.
DJ – here is the agreement announcement – no mention of 500K from Davies
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jul/27/rangers-relaunched-brechin
Domaine Jessiaume says:
August 13, 2012 at 18:12
The source is the agreement, or the agreement is the source.
Take it or leave it mate
****************
So this means anyoen can post nonsense and when asked for the source say take it or leave it.
I guess if this is the MO for the website we can close the doors and switch the light out……
Webster says: August 13, 2012 at 18:06
My point being, of course: if there WAS a debt what do Sclyde council tax payers think about providing a service to a club which still owes them money?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Webster – I totally agree.
Rangers(IA) do indeed owe money to Strathclyde Police as well as the Scottish ambulance service and several Scottish local councils.
The silence from these organisations is sad, but not surprising, fear of reprisal is a terrible thing. (Although you might think the the Scottish Government Minister for Local Government might say something? ha ha)
BUT as others have said today, there is no Scottish Law on football creditors the way there is in England – so paying of these football debts debts from money owed to Rangers(IA) from whatever source, SFA, other fooball teams that owed Rangers(IA) transfer fees etc – is Illegal.
I hope BDO will say something about this, but there is such an enormous scale of criminal activity taking place here – combined with stunning blurring of lines between Rangers(IA) and The Rangers then as ever I fear the worse 🙁
You may have heard that STV will be screening live Scottish football games starting with the Celtic, Helsingborg game. Just thought I would post these instructions for tuning your Sky box to receive STV if you don’t live in Scotland.
HOW TO TUNE INTO STV ON SKY USING YOUR SKY DIGIBOX AND SKY REMOTE CONTROL
Here’s 10 easy steps to pick up STV’s “Scotsport Rugby Sunday” on Sky every Sunday starting on 11th November… remember once you have programmed your Sky box to get STV you will never need to programme it again. If you still are having problems, call the hotline on 07977 986849 and they’ll talk you through it.
1) Press “Services” on your Sky Remote and a list of 8 or 9 selections will appear.
2) Press “4” or scroll down to highlight selection number 4 which is “Add Channels”. Another menu will appear displaying Frequency, Polarization, Symbol Rate and FEC.
3) Change the Frequency by tapping in the five numbers 10906.
4) Change the Polarization to “V” using your left or right curser on your remote control.
5) Change the Symbol Rate to 22.0 using your left or right curser on your remote control.
6) Change the FEC number to display 5/6 using your left or right curser on your remote control.
7) Move your curser to highlight “Find Channels” at the bottom of the menu and press “Select”.
8) You will now see a list of available channels including STV. Simply highlight STV and press the yellow button. A tick will now appear next to STV. Press “Select” again to store STV.
9) Press “Back Up” several times to come out of all the menus until you get your Sky picture again.
10) Whenever you wish to watch STV in the future simply press “Services” on your remote control which will bring up the menu. Press “9” or scroll down to highlight selection 9 which is “Other Channels” and you will then be able to highlight STV and press “Select” to watch.
Sounds complicated but it’s simple and will take you less than 2 minutes. Well worth it!
Why would aluko’s registration with hull be held up when his contract with dead club had expired and he was a free agent or are the sfa trying thier best to get compensation from aluko before they give him permission to play.How much longer are the guardian’s of our game going to be servant’s to dead club
Great news that STV are showing live games – including Celtic’s Champions League game – I thought it was Armageddon if we lost RFC(ia) ? more money into the game, all good.
Ian Murray very brave on sportsound this evening – and the Ian Black fury being agreed with by all on the programe – so its not just us who are paranoid
ExiledCelt says:
August 13, 2012 at 18:21
So this means anyoen can post nonsense and when asked for the source say take it or leave it.
I guess if this is the MO for the website we can close the doors and switch the light out……
———————————————————————
It’s worked for Traynor, Keevins and co. for years 😉
Gym Trainer – my point exactly LOL – or as the late and not so great James Sanderson would say when cornered – where you at the game, didn’t think so……………
Webster – here’s the full ist – still makes me feel sick looking at it:
http://www.scotsman.com/the-scotsman/scotland/rangers-administration-full-list-of-creditors-1-2325870
Rangers administration: Full list of creditors Published on Wednesday 30 May 2012 00:00
THE full list of creditors is as follows:
A K Ray, Ross Hall Hospital, Glasgow £150
ADI UK, Preston £7620
AS St Etienne, France £252,212.39
ASL, East Sussex £2514
Acies Group, Edinburgh £2340
Adrian Coll, Balloch £1600
Alan Duncan, Glasgow £1400
Alexander West Property, Glasgow £2807
Alison Walker TV, Bearsden £600
Alliance Video, Surrey £204
Aon Limited, London £14,151
Arena Imaging, Derby £336
Argyll and Bute Council £406.80
Arsenal Football Club £136,560
Astra Hygiene Supplies, Dumbarton £61.27
Audi Stirling £396.05
Azure Support Services, Macclesfield £523,949.71
Azzurri Scotland, Burnley £34.63
BTWShiells, Belfast £2917.39
Barr Environmental Limited, Cummnock £264
Base Soccer Agency, London £52,560
Bauer Radio Ltd (Radio Clyde) £702
Beyard Services, Beith £5559.60
Bhutta’s Newsagents, Glasgow £567.45
Big Think Agency, Glasgow £14,265.60
Blooms UK Limited, Glasgow £70
Brabners, Manchester £12,999
Brentwood Estates, Manchester £42,963.06
Brian Proudfoot, Glasgow £2,802
British Gas £1,562.42
BT £1,292.13
Business Cost Consultants, Glasgow £6,240.60
Business Stream, Edinburgh £9,727.22
CNP Professional, Cheshire £719.96
CRE8, Gloucester £68,406.70
Cairn Financial, London £4,127.60
Cairns & Scott Caterhire, Glasgow £762
Cameron Presentations, Glasgow £8,795.99
Campbell Medical Supplies, Paisley £3,386.73
Camtec, Herts £552
Canniesburn Taxis, Bearsden £269.69
Capital Solutions, Edinburgh £11,423.40
Capito Ltd, Livingston £1,049.69
Carberry’s Coaches, Portadown Co Armagh £1,200
Carnival Chaos Production, Edinburgh £672
Carol Govan, Glasgow £600
Cask Productions, Glasgow £1,980
Cask Sports, Glasgow £2,919.60
Catercare Scotland, Stewarton £420
Charlton Chauffeur Drive, Glasgow £792
Chelsea FC £238,345.43
Childcare Vouchers, London £1,143.74
Chilli It, Chester £416.52
Chris Clarke, Kilmarnock £150
Christine Siebelt, Milngavie £1,100
Citrus Office Solutions, Lancashire £4,304.24
City Electrical Factors, Glasgow £215.40
Clyde Productions, Glasgow £180
Coca Cola £10,133.91
Colin Suggett, Sunderland £741.80
Collstream Limited, Derby £5,779.37
Collyer Bristow, London £40,691.22
Colours Agency Glasgow £1,980
Computer Links, Livingston £2,146.32
Computershare Investor Service, Bristol, £23,855.03
Craig Services & Access East Sussex £900
Culture & Sport Glasgow £10,338.96
Daily Record & Sunday Mail £312
DealBureau Commercial Finance, Southend £10,000
Decco Limited, Glasgow £174.72
Dell Computer Corporation, Berkshire £272.85
Direct Medical Imaging, Lancashire £230
Disclosure Scotland £372
Dominique S Byrne, Nuffield Hospital, Glasgow £160
Dr David A S Marshall, Bridge of Weir £160
Dundas & Wilson, Edinburgh £24,027.84
E.ON £8,827.14
Eagle Consulting, Inverness £40
Eagle Couriers, Bathgate £96.60
Eden Springs, Blantyre £644.64
Edinburgh Audi £5,197.08
Electrical Was te Recycling, County
Durham £18
Enterprise Rent-a-Car, Stirling £9,000
Events Audio Visual, Clydebank £300
Exchequer Corporate Finance , Surrey £4,000
Executive Hire, Harlow £1,060
FES FM, Stirling £80,874.93
FL Memo, London £116.86
FX Signs, Glasgow £15,546.56
G Media Mangement, Cheltenham £995
G4S, Surrey £295,036.24
GTG Training, Glasgow £396
Gareth Neil Design, Glasgow £3,200
Gerry McGeoch, Glasgow £150
Glasgow Audi £1,041.62
Glasgow City Council £5,000
Glasgow City Council (Council Tax) £2,008.21
Glasgow Leading Attractions (The Willow Tea Rooms) £1,525
Glasgow Taxis £TBC
Glencairn Crystal Studio, East Kilbide £354
Gordon McKay, Blackridge £150
HOBS Reprographics, Glasgow £270.15
HSS Hire Service £67.10
Hamilton Brothers, Bishopton £115.56
Hay McKerron Associates, Milngavie £3,600
Hepscott Water Systems, Morpeth £1,190.28
Hrvoje Bojanic Beethoveova, Zagreb, Croatia £2,898.42
Hutchesons Eductational Trust, Glasgow £550
ILC Media, Preston £2,040
IMG Media, Chiswick £180
Impact Signs, Cumbernauld £9,482.79
Integrated Cleaning Management, Hampshire £3,329.19
Iris Chorus Application Software, Devon £5,973.60
Iris Ticketing, Devon £37,210.42
Iron Mountain, Livingston £1,271.16
JCM Business Consulting, Paisley £2,745
JJB Sports £19,390.59
James Gordon (Engineers), Galston £1,437.68
Jewson, Glasgow £930.60
Joe Lennon Picture Framing, Bearsden £840
John Deere, Gloucester £41,191.59
K7X, Ayr, £240
Kalamazoo Secure Solutions, Birmingham £4,017
Keith Hawley, Glasgow £2,600
Kevin Cameron Radio Service, Paisley £600
Kube Networks, Glasgow £7,672.08
L & S Litho, Glasgow £17,035.04
Lothian Power Clean, Larkhall £194.34
LSK Supplies, Glasgow £178.58
Lawrie Furnishings, Paisley £607.20
Limelight Networks , Arizona £2,333.49
Link Seating Limited, Worcestershire £606.98
Loomis UK, Nottingham £2,248.08
Louis Grace Electrical, Glasgow £1,087.84
Lyco Direct Limited , Milton Keynes £2,381.27
MSM Solicitors, Paisley £420
MacGregor Industrial Supplies, Inverness £106.76
Mackinnon Partners, Gourock £200
Manchester City FC £328,248.71
Manea Florin Bucharest £37,500
Mar Hall, Bishopton £5,511.90
Marsh Ltd UK, Norwich £779.10
Martin Dawes, Warrington £654.74
Media House, Glasgow £19,200
MediaCom, Edinburgh £11,544.42
Menzies Hotels, Derbyshire £257.40
Michael Douglas, Glasgow £100
Milngavie Mini Market £413.29
Modular Property Holdings, Glasgow £20,930.22
Motif Promotional Clothing, Glasgow £27.29
Murray Group Holdings, Edinburgh £278,964.30
Nairn Brown (Glasgow) £1,492.50
National Car Rental, Leicester £162.52
Navyblue Design Group, Edinburgh £6,960
Newline Products, Glasgow £7,001
Newsquest (Herald & Times £1,500
Nexo S.A., France £1,799.37
Nicola Young, Glasgow £3,500
Noble Grossart, Edinburgh £18,612
Nordic Scouting, Oslo £20,000
North Glasgow College £11,041.80
OHSS, Edinburgh £234
OfficeFurnitureOnline.co.uk, Dumfires £338.40
Ooyala, California £733.92
Opal Telecom £169.72
Orebro SK £150,000
Oxford Hotels & Inns (Carnoustie) £3,709.96
PR Newswire Europe £300
PTS – Plumbing Trade Supplies, Leicester £30.42
Paramed, Howwood £1,050
Parklands Country Club, Glasgow £500
Parks of Hamilton £7,256
Paton Plant, York £1,450.16
Perform Group, Middlesex £346,097.43
Pineapple Aroundshot, Co Durham £2,316.96
Pineapple Photographic, Co Durham £5,875
Ping Network Solutions, Glasgow £4,020.25
Plum Films, Edinburgh £3,000
Posh Deli, Glasgow £260
Postage by Phone, Essex £510.80
Premier Cash Registers, Glasgow £12,600
Prime Commercial Properties
Management, London £10,805.53
Professional Pre-Season Tours (Libero), Glasgow £60,000
Quick Shift Tyre Service, Glasgow £48
R.F.Brown, Hamilton £1,681.44
RBS WorldPay, Cambridge £180.66
RS Components Limited, Northants £204.95
Rangers Lotteries Ltd, Glasgow £105.80
Reed Business Information, Surrey £2,764.80
Renfrewshire Council HQ £108
Restore Scotland, Paisley £579.74
Rigby Taylor Limited, Bolton £10,762.16
Rodgers Sercurity Systems, Glasgow £342.50
Ross Hall Hospital, Glasgow £770.50
Ross Promotional, Glasgow £1,022.88
Royal Mail £3,262.54
SDL Group, Glasgow £1,350
SG World, Cheshire £577.56
SIR Teknologi, West Sussex £TBC
SK Rapid, Austria £1,011,763.44
STRI, West Yorkshire £17.28
Saffery Champness, Glasgow £31,028.01
Scot-West Business Forms, Glasgow £749.60
Scotprint, Haddington £7,514
Scotrae Productions, Greenock £17,058.94
Scottish Ambulance Service £8,438.40
Scottish Hydro Electric £62,527.30
Scottish Power £302.44
Search Promotional Merchandise, Buckinghamshire £6,240
Shanks Waste Management, Southampton £122.58
Sharon Agnew, Glasgow £460
Shawfield Timber, Glasgow, £786.24
Shell UK £7,637.94
Shields Land Rover, Glasgow £246.75
Shred-it Glasgow £444
Sign Plus, Dunfermline £2,473.22
Signature Industries, London £1,507.90
Simplewaste Solutions, Clydebank £17,626.26
Sinclair Pharmacy, Glasgow £1,909.79
Slater Menswear , Glasgow £688.31
Solutions.tv, Glasgow £2,652
Sound Acoustic Productions, Glasgow £12,000
Souters Irrigation Services, Cumbernauld £456
Spike Multiedia, Giffnock £5,312.50
Sporting iD, Tyne and Wear £144.70
Sportopps.com, Belfast £150
Sports Alliance, Bury £2,006.65
Sports Revolution, London £5,034.52
Stellar Football, London £72,000
Stirling Fire Protection £1,149.30
Stockline Plastics, Glasgow £258
Strathclyde Police £51,882
Striking Imagery, Cumbernauld £113.51
Stuart MacMorran, Clydebank £422.50
Summit Asset Management, Surrey £70,555.88
Susan Thomson Your Sonsie Face, Glasgow £40
TNT £1,255.39
Tabs FM, London, £1,980
Tellcomm Limited, West Midlands £6,435.89
The Arco Group, Hull £443.43
The Brite Bulb, Bishopbriggs £3,209.64
The Burnbrae, Bearsden £1,403.88
The Business & Property Bureau, Bearsden £7,376
The Business Incentives Group, Glasgow £1,893.60
The City of Edinburgh Council £90
The Fees Company, Edinburgh £118.16
The Financial Times £3,480
The Scottish Football League £3,859.92
The Premier Property Group, Edinburgh £103,210.96
Thistle International Freight, Paisley £128.42
Thistle Storage Equipment, Cumbernauld £140.40
Thomas Cook Sport, Manchester £129,216.56
Ticket Team, Netherlands £873.36
Ticketline Network, Manchester £11,668.67
Trade UK (Screwfix) £77.01
Trident Trust Company, Jersey £40,689.90
UK Fast, Manchester £689.78
US Citta di Palermo, Italy £205,513.04
Umbro £1,756.05
University of the West of Scotland £135
Vodafone £204
Voicescape, Manchester £786.84
William Henderson, Glasgow £275
Yuill & Kyle Solicitors, Glasgow £1,486.80
Celtic FC £40,337
Dundee United FC £65,981.49
Dunfermline Athletic FC £83,370.13
Heart of Midlothian FC £800,000
Inverness Caledonian Thistle FC £39,805
SPL £22,500
SFA 11,089.04
HM Revenue & Customs £14,372,042
Ticketus, London £26,700,000
Debenture Holders (various) £7,736,000
Season Ticket Holders (various) £TBC
Employees Various £TBC
Anyone know what the SFA response to FIFA question on withholding international clearance? Surely the PFA Scotland and agents would wish clarity on the matter for their current clients and future clients contracted to clubs that attempt a TUPE transfer.
For UEFA General Secretary Gianni Infantino, today’s play-off draw in Nyon not only marked the threshold of an exciting new UEFA Champions League season but also signalled another major step forward in the development of European football’s top club competition.
The draw proceedings featured ten teams in the champions route and another ten in the league route, all with the ambition of joining the 22 automatic qualifiers in the 2012/13 group stage. What gave added significance to this assigning of teams to ties – with five match-ups in each route – was that “the new season of UEFA Champions League football heralds the start of another three-year cycle,” Mr Infantino explained to the club representatives.
“We have a new commercial partner on board and there are some changes on our squad list of TV partners who do a great job of promoting the world’s best club competition and transmitting the thrills and emotions that it generates,” he said. “The new cycle also heralds an increase in revenue – which, in today’s economic climate, is quite remarkable and confirms just how attractive this competition is.
“We can be very satisfied when we observe that football continues to thrive even in a difficult economic climate. The strength of our beautiful sport goes over the many difficulties our world is experiencing and makes it one of the few global catalysts for collective enjoyment.”
However, the UEFA General Secretary was at pains to emphasise that any further growth in the UEFA Champions League has to be accompanied by the upholding of football’s values and integrity in the face of threats such as racism, violence, corruption and match-fixing.
“That [prosperity] does not signify that football lives in an island of its own – football values are continuously threatened by serious dangers like racism, violence, corruption and match-fixing,” he said, before urging the clubs to continue to assist in the safeguarding of the game’s true spirit.
“All those who are involved and have responsibilities in football – we the governing bodies but also you the clubs – have a compelling duty to be more than vigilant and proactive in tackling such threats as they can kill the soul of our sport and break the love affair football enjoys with millions of fans,” Mr Infantino went on.
“That’s why UEFA will keep our zero-tolerance policy for any type of wrongdoing, with preventive action and sanctions when needed. We know we can count on your full support and active cooperation.”
WELL SAID SIR, Please ask the SFA if they agree with your comments .
Maybe we need to remind UEFA of the situation in Scotland with regard to THE RANGERS
Can someone remind me why Rangers PLC (IA) owe £550 to Hutchesons Grammar? Were they paying someone’s school fees? I had forgotten just how odd some of that creditors list reads.
1 130 million pounds owed to creditors
2 Used EBTs illegally for a least 10 years
3 appealed to Court of Session
4 Attack on Appellate
5 Threats of Armageddon if not accepted into SPL or SFL
6 Allowed to join the 3rd Division without any mention of 3 years accounts
7 accepted into 3rd Div. as associate member
8 Denied other properly constituted clubs a place in Div. 3
9 Played with improper kit
10 Allowed to join Div. 3 without a fit and proper report being provided.
11 Have used several players this season already who have question marks hanging over them about their registration.
12 HMRC encouraging phoenixism of oldco – unheard of.
13 D & P derisory valuation of Oldco deliberately shafting all creditors for the benefit of one person.
14 Ogilvy, straight forward and on-going conflict of interest
15 A transfer ban that was already handed down by the authorities appealed to court of session against FIFA/UEFA regulations. Incredibly when this ban reappears it is put into abeyance until the 1st of September proving that there is reward in breaking FIFA/UEFA/SFA rules and also having the effect of totally diluting the punishment already adjudicated on.
16 Strathclyde’s finest’s unusual and tardy behaviour.
I have deliberately resisted differentiated between oldco and newco, as ,obviously, these same people wish to muddy the waters – except for the shedding the 130 million pounds, that is, owed to creditors big and small.
I know this list is only the tip of the ice-berg so come on fellow bloggers and add to this list, and please correct above if required. It will be the definitive list of corruption ever overseen by a governing body SPL/SFA and even perhaps the officers charged with implementing the the law of the land.
Pantheon Puppets/Muppets
Turnbull Hutton
Alex Thomson Daily Record Jabba
Mark Daly Keevins
Charles Bannerman Richard Wilson
RTC Dodds
TSFM Herald
Paul McConville Strathclyde Police