Comment on Whose assets are they anyway? by southstandcharlie.
Against my principles, I had a quick look at the online Daily Record to see what kind of spin they would employ to dampen and defuse yesterday’s Celtic’s statement. I feared the worst and I wasn’t disappointed.
So we have “….according to a source close to the situation at Hampden….”
“But the source told Record Sport: “There is no need for Rangers to take such a stance and there is no point in people calling for titles to be stripped because it can’t happen.
“There is no legal vehicle for it to happen. They’ve already been found guilty – it’s double jeopardy, if you like. They can’t be re-tried for something they’ve been found guilty of.
“So many people on both sides of this argument are speaking without knowing the facts or the legalities.
“And on top of that, it is my understanding that there is little appetite from other clubs to strip Rangers of their titles, even if they are not coming out and saying it.”
This report displays more of the same nonsense we, as football supporters, have had to put up with throughout this saga. No openness at all from our football authorities. Instead, secrecy, subterfuge, spin, leaks, etc etc. Instead of someone at the SFA openly setting out their stance we have, alledgedly, an anonymous source helping out their pet integrity-strapped newspaper to further their blatant pro Ibrox club agenda. It really has to stop. The Daily Record is implicated throughout this shameful period, doing the SFA/SPFL’s dirty work, covering up, and in fact playing its part in duping and hence prolonging the agony of the supporters of the club it obviously tries to help protect.
For my own part, I had largely lost interest in Scottish football during Rangers’ period of devious dominance. Without knowing the mechanics of the situation, I sensed something was amiss in their ability to procure such big name players for our modest league. If that wasn’t enough, there were other factors at play too, for example the officials’ consistent ability to turn a blind eye to such as Paul Gasgoine’s flying elbows etc.
Having returned to the fold in recent years, I’m enjoying it much more. Sure, Celtic are dominant domestically, but it seems to me a much more natural factor, given their larger support and the financial benefits that affords. I can live with that, it’s part of the romance of football with the chance of the smaller clubs doing the odd giant-killing act. At least it’s fair.
i now really, really need my own club to show solidarity and come out in support of Celtic’s statement. If they don’t then I intend to let them know I am unhappy. If we meekly accept the conniving of the authorities to engineer the favoured club back into the top league at any cost, then the game is a goner and I’m off. The Rangers are still grossly overspending to regain their “rightful place” and if they get away with all this, we can only expect more of the same nonsense in the future.
Whose assets are they anyway?
Just out on STV Sport –
“Celtic say it is down to the Scottish football authorities to ensure “sporting integrity” is upheld, in the wake of a court ruling that Rangers’ used a tax avoidance scheme.
The Court of Session decided last week that the Ibrox side’s Employee Benefit Trusts, used between 2000 and 2011, were used to pay employees and should have been subject to income tax.
The ruling has prompted the board of the Scottish Professional Football League to discuss the matter, with their lawyers reviewing what course of action, if any, should now be taken.
A 2013 commission chaired by Lord Nimmo Smith levied a £250,000 fine on the Ibrox club due to their non-disclosure to the league of the payments.
A statement from Celtic read: “We are aware of last week’s Court of Session ruling, which we note is subject to potential appeal.
“Celtic’s position on this issue is consistent – that this remains a matter for the courts of law and also the Scottish football authorities whose rules are intended to uphold sporting integrity.
“In 2013, we expressed surprise – shared by many observers and supporters of the game – over the findings of the SPL Commission that no competitive or sporting advantage had resulted. That remains our view.”
Game on, I believe……
Whose assets are they anyway?
Yet another example today of Dave King’s almost endless production of statements completely contracting his previous ones.
“With regard to EBTs, I was on the board so I have to take some responsibility.‘And I follow the logic of the argument that if we lose the tax case then we probably gained some competitive advantage.‘I believe that, on behalf of myself and most of the board members who were with me and probably agree with me, that we should apologise for that.”
“First, irrespective of the final outcome of the tax appeal …..the football team had no advantage from any tax savings from the scheme put in place by the Murray Group. Throughout the period in question the shareholders were committed to providing funding to the club.
“The tax scheme may have reduced the need for shareholders to provide higher levels of funding so, as I have tried to make clear in the past, any advantage gained would have been to the company and its shareholders, not the team.
“Certain players may not have signed for the club without the perceived benefit of personal tax savings but there was no general advantage for the player squad, or the performance on the pitch.
“We would still have signed players of equal abilities if one or two had decided they didn’t want to sign under different financial circumumstances.”
Of course, the first was at a time he was trying to oust the sitting board. And the second about a club who eventually couldn’t even pay the fee of the match day face painter.
Whose assets are they anyway?
high beeswax at 10.03pm
hello darkness my old friend sang the sfa……..
I’ve come to talk with you again sang Mike Ashley’s lawyer…….
LNS – A Summary
bordersdon 16th December 2015 at 11:37 am”Put a little more eloquently than my statement.I’m sure the message you express will be shared by many, many Dons fans everywhere who supported our team through the cheating times. Chances of a reply from SM? Very slim I suspect but if he were to received hundreds/thousands of similar letter and/or a petition was to be organised he would have to react? (well you would hope!!!)”
I recall there was an initial attempt to place newco The Rangers in the top league after the liquidation event. I’m fairly certain that at that time the SPL chairman were generally in support of this plan. I also recall that a poll was run by the local Aberdeen paper, the Evening Express, which resulted in a significant majority of Dons fans saying they would boycott Pittodrie in this event. It was only after that poll that Mr Milne spoke out in opposition to the plan. On that occasion fan power had the necessary effect.
It is therefore very disappointing to hear his latest comments. He obviously needs a sharp reminder and I intend to join with the other voices here in delivering it to him. I’m very serious that if The Rangers are in any way manipulated back into the top league then I won’t be back.
LNS – A Summary
Summoned by the discussion about Mr Warburton’s future, a random thought which has floated about inside my head for some time resurfaced. I have always found it a curious development that the new club sourced a manager who had a previous career as a city trader. A rare combination indeed. Given the succession of dodgy financial wheeler dealers who have (dis)graced the Ibrox boardroom since the new club’s inception, it is indeed too large a coincidence for me to easily swallow. I stress I have no evidence to offer, but my intuition suggests there is a connection. Could he have been lured to Ibrox, for example, with promises of rich pickings from future share manipulations or similar?
Now that resolution 10 has failed and the financial future looks fairly grim, with no obvious opportunity for imminent financial shenanigans, rumours immediately surface that Mr Warburton’s might be for the off. The old intuition is furiously flashing again. Another coincidence? Is there a connection?
LNS – A Summary
This has just end been posted on follow follow.com.
“Michael Ashley fails in legal bid to interfere with Rangers AGM
Mike Ashley made a late bid this week to obtain an interdict to stop three resolutions going before the Rangers AGM.Today in the Court of Session in Edinburgh two of his arguments were thrown out and the third, and least important, was continued to a later date.Essentially resolutions 9, 10 and 11 set out to give the Rangers Board power to issue new shares, to convert loans from wealthy fans into shares and to remove Ashley’s voting rights as he already has a considerable interest in another European club, namely Newcastle United. As this issue also involved the SFA is it likely to run and run.By leaving the legal challenge so late, Ashley’s representatives have continued in a long campaign that suspiciously looks like an attempt to wear down the club and directors by issuing legal complaint after legal complaint – costing the club hundreds of thousands of pounds and having the threat of personal liability hanging over the directors.This latest humiliation for Ashley is unlikely to be the last attempt to browbeat Rangers but must surely make his advisors and shareholders in Sports Direct question the sanity of allowing such an embarrassing farce to continue as it increasingly looks like ego rather than business sense is the motivating factor.”
i have no idea if this is accurate or not.
LNS – A Summary
Just belatedly catching up on the goings-on today. Much has already been said about the pathetic Alex Mooney article, and rightly so, but one other sentence that jumped out at me was this.
“Millions of words have been written and spoken on the saga yet any solution appears to be as elusive as ever.”
Yet another angle to support the “time to move on” onslaught by suggesting a solution is elusive. No it isn’t. It’s anything but elusive, it’s as obvious as the sun in the sky. Impose an appropriate sanction for the years of blatant wrong-doing then we can move on.
Fairly simple, Alex.
The Case for a New SFA.
Danish Pastry 12th October 2015 at 8:54 am
“Almost a year to go before next competitive match. Plenty of time to get younger players in via friendlies or get-togethers.”
I couldn’t disagree more. International matches are few and far between, particularly non-vital ones. While I appreciate Darren Fletcher has been a fine and loyal player for Scotland over the years, I’m sure even he would appreciate the over-riding need to look start planning for the next campaign as soon as possible. Particularly as this one ended in failure. If Strachan wanted to give him a run out and a thank you for his service, he could have put him in the starting line up. Once the score was comfortable was the time to give the new boys a decent 2nd half run out. Naismith will probably feature in the next campaign and rightly so. So can anyone provide any justification for giving him the last 15 mins rather than a new boy?
Other than Stachan wanting to make his personal performance stats look better at the expense of forward planning and the future needs of the team……..