It has recently been suggested to me quite strongly by two separate Finance Industry experts that no matter the outcomes of the forthcoming criminal trials into the sale of Rangers and the subsequent disposal of the liquidated assets, it is highly unlikely that the sale will be reversed. In fact BDO (the liquidators of Rangers) see the path of least resistance to any remedy (if guilty verdicts are returned) through the professional indemnity insurance held by organisations involved (I am choosing my words carefully here to comply with the rules surrounding the court case).
There is of course still the dispute between the owners of Sevco 5088 and Sevco Scotland to consider (although depending on the outcome of the criminal cases, that may be moot).
On the face of it, all of this is good news for TRFC and Dave King. After all, one of the main problems they have been facing is the uncertainty over the ownership of the assets, and if BDO are swinging in the direction indicated above, King and his board are free to move forward – you would think.
The recent plans to raise cash from the fans is I think a smart one, but it is still a sticking plaster applied to a gunshot wound. Rangers already have a gate income which is the envy of not just most Scottish clubs, but clubs much further afield. Their problem is their astronomical fixed costs, their dilapidated infrastructure, and possible cash outflow through the fabled ‘onerous contracts’.
Even putting in place a severe austerity package (which may be unpalatable to fans being asked to part with their cash to buy off pesky shareholders who don’t share King’s vision) does not remove the need to capitalise urgently to repair the stadium and build a squad capable of competing in Scotland. So they need to raise cash, and they need it quickly – because soft loans cannot be provided forever.
So the share issue route is the obvious way to go, and to do that effectively, a listing on an exchange is required. However our sources in the financial world don’t think it is possible that this could happen with the current regime for the following reasons (not in order of importance);
- They have absolutely no credible business plan to move forward over the next five years – only a commitment to limping on with soft loans;
- The current chairman is a convicted felon;
- Two directors of the new company were directors of the company now in liquidation;
- They have no line of credit;
- They are already in debt to the tune of at least £12m – increasing as I write;
- They are unable to repay that debt;
- There is still a nominal (even if we accept the BDO position above) doubt over the ownership of assets;
- The football team does not play in the top league – and European income isn’t coming soon;
- The company have astronomical fixed costs which are way in excess of their income.
So even if the doubt over the ownership of assets is removed, there isn’t an easily navigable route for TRFC into calmer waters.
My own conclusion is that perhaps the biggest single thing that is holding Rangers back is Dave King. I really don’t know what his motivation is. There is speculation that he has his eyes on the increasing cash-pot and diminishing creditor list at the Oldco. Some Rangers bloggers are suggesting that a land-grab play is taking place. I think the former is far more plausible than the latter, but if we take his RRM credential at face-value, it seems to me that the Rangers-minded thing for him to do would be to reverse himself out of the position he is in.
That might enable the company to raise some of the cash they need to repair the stadium, rebuild the infrastructure within the club (players, management, youth and scouting etc.).
Are King, Taylor and Park really in this so they can indefinitely fork out £10m per year? Will Taylor and Park continue to ally themselves with King if he is the impediment to inward investment that we think he is? Park will most certainly not, and my information, from sources very close to him, is that he is done.
The fractures in KingCo are beginning to appear, and King himself may come under increasing pressure to do what is best for the future of the club, which is to remove himself from the equation and allow those better placed to take it forward.
It is often speculated elsewhere that SFM is a Celtic blog, and even those who give us credit for being a much broader church than that will still insist that we are anti-Rangers, obsessed with Rangers, and out to get Rangers.
The occasional outburst of Schadenfreude from commenters aside (it IS a football forum after all guys) SFM is quite definitely not editorially anti-Rangers.
I think the evidence shows that we are nothing of the kind, and it doesn’t do Rangers any favours to conflate our position on the corrupt nature of the governance of the game with that of the Ibrox club – new or old. Where we do discuss Rangers (as we have in this article), it is with an acknowledgment that the money flying around in football makes all of our clubs vulnerable to the kind of rip-off merchants who have wandered in and out of Ibrox in the past few years.
There are many areas where the SFM consensus is unpalatable to Rangers fans. But protecting all of our clubs and their fans from mismanagement is hopefully not one of them.
Also, despite the many rivalries within the game, Rangers are an important focus (old club or new) for tens of thousands of fans. As such they are of interest to ALL of us who support football in this country. Anyway, I tend to be more obsessive about my own club – and find it rather easier to be objective about others 🙂
My own preference in moving the debate forward is to get the perspective of Rangers fans on these issues. I am ever hopeful that we can have Rangers fans engage with the blog and look for areas where we have common purpose.
Nobody at SFM wants Rangers fans to have no team to support. Nobody here wants the SFA to stay unregulated and unaccountable. Nobody at SFM wants people to make up rules they go along just for the sake of a few quid. I can’t believe that Rangers fans don’t share those values.
I agree that Rangers fans are victims of this affair to a large extent, but the culprits are quite definitely not us at SFM. They need to look closer to home to find them.
https://rangerstaxcase.wordpress.com/
Tax Case Result
21/11/2012
The tax case result released yesterday afternoon was obviously a surprise. After reading the findings, it is still difficult to understand how two of the three judges arrived at such a decision. The third dissenting judge’s opinion was clearly more in line with expectations. However, in the First Tier Tribunal it is a case of majority rule.
If an appeal is launched, it will take several more months before we get the next level of decision. Appeals are not automatically granted, but in this case- with a dissenting judge and where a dispute over legal interpretation exists already- it seems certain. At the Upper Tribunal, new evidence is not introduced and the case is not re-argued. The judges at the Upper Tribunal will hear legal arguments over whether the First Tier Tribunal judges made an error in interpreting the law and will rule accordingly.
This blog brought light to a matter of public interest. This blog has been accurate on all of the major points of the case except the one that matters most to date- the FTT outcome.
We thank everyone who has participated. Hopefully, we will see the result reversed on appeal.
Auldheid 5th November 2015 at 12:10 am #The Cat NR1 5th November 2015 at 12:04 am # Corrupt official 4th November 2015 at 11:35 pm #jimbo 4th November 2015 at 10:15 pm #Sorry, should have more correctly said from a poster on etims ——————————————————————– Worth pointing out Jimbo, that Mr Adam resigned in Sept 2000, and points to EBT’s being in use up to 5 years previously. http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/latest/adam-shakes-ibrox-pillars-with-warning-of-bankruptcy-1-595808#axzz3qZFbu9Fl————————————————————I though the DOS wee tax case EBTs started in 1999.
========= They did and there is documented evidence to that effect. There is only Hugh Adams word on prior skulduggery.
===============
I thought so Auldheid. Thanks for confirming.
So was he implying that they were effectively paying boot money prior to that, or is it more likely that he was just getting confused about the timeline?
In the very unlikely event of the former, we’re moving into uncharted waters and even Bryson would struggle to come up with something other than the classic war crimes excuse of “it was all a very long time ago”. However, I’m heavily inclined towards the latter and that he was just referring to the DOS EBTs, and given that he passed away nearly three years back we’re not going to get a clarification.
Why SDM used ebts to recruit players. From FTT 29 Oct 2010 pages 125/6
Q. I’m just going to ask you a few questions, Sir David. 18 When I ask them, could you direct the answers to the 19 Tribunal. 20 A. Certainly. 21 Q. Because they want to hear what you’re going to say. If 22 we can go to the remuneration trust. 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. And its operation. Would you describe it or would you 25 not as a tax avoidance scheme?Page 126
1 A. No, not at all. I think it was a method of us 2 acquiring, especially football wise, better players in a 3 more cost effective manner than we would be able do so. 4 In the football world, we’re in a very competitive game 5 and you’re competing with players and countries all 6 around the world. And we were very ambitious at that 7 time. And it was seen as a correct and proper way for 8 us to proceed.
9 Q. In relation to Group employees, other than footballers, 10 would you consider that the trust has been a success or 11 not, in incentivising those persons? 12 A. If you want to retain good people, good people need to 13 be incentivised. Although business has been very 14 difficult recently, I’ve got a great team of people 15 around me. We’ve gone through a difficult time. We got 16 hit with our bank hitting troubles, the property market 17 collapsing, as I said in my statement. The price of 18 metal collapsed. So up until such times it was a good 19 way of safeguarding people to stay with the Group and 20 rewarding them in an efficient manner.
21 Q. As regards football players, was it a success in getting 22 good football players, do you think? 23 A. As a club, we have been very successful, because we’ve 24 been able to attract players of a certain standard that, 25 perhaps, we may not have been able to do otherwise.
To assist our smsm ?
sannoffymesssoitizz 5th November 2015 at 10:57 am #https://rangerstaxcase.wordpress.com/
=======================
The partially complete article from yesterday has been removed, and the previous article from three years ago is again the most recent.
A View From Gorgie pointing out that the SPFL has precedent for retrospective points deduction in current seasons for tax defaulting in previous seasons.
Note that this even involves the SPFL punishing a club that was then in the old SFL at the time of the tax default. (Which the club admitted to)
That will be the same Livingston FC who had in earlier years to put up a bond to allow them to compete given fears of future financial insecurity.
http://viewfromgorgie.co.uk/index.php/articles/youngy-s-view/14-strip-tease.
We are back to the old argument of apply the rules across the board without fear or favour.
Posted on 5th November 2015 by in Uncategorised
Comment on Whose assets are they anyway? by sickofitall.
Just a quick poll thumbs up anyone who would like to see titles stripped thumbs down if you would not
This judgement must really put aside the findings of Nimmo Smith. NS was either misled, duped or has no ‘common sense’. He is looking a little bit ‘daft’ today given the findings of the judges which states pretty plainly that a sporting advantage was obtained as the players in question would have no doubt gone elsewhere.
However has the SFA/SPFL have the integrity to do something about it.
Hirsute Pursuit 1.15
“When the relevant dates were changed – so that the irregular DOS payments were excluded from LNS scrutiny – it is almost certainly because there was no rule in force at the time that forced clubs to disclose player contracts”.
Nope it was simpler than that although I think from memory the registration rules preceded 1999.
What determined the date was the earliest side letter (to Flo) of 23 Nov 2000 that was provided by Duff and Phelps to the Harper MacLeod. Why the De Boer side letter of 30 Aug and more importantly the damming HMRC letter of 23 Feb 2011 which referred to it was not provided and why both were not are questions that should have been asked last year by SPFL when SFM sent them those very documents.
In the silence since I have had to learn the correct spelling of skulduggery (hope I got it right there)
Regarding why Rangers started using DOS and EBTs when they did.
In the late 90s and early 2000s HMRC had already been actively shutting down a number of mechanisms that the highly paid (such as footballers) were using to avoid paying their fair share of tax. The favoured vehicles at that time were film partnerships, which had exploited a provision by which film production in the UK was afforded some tax breaks to encourage, you know, actual film production in the UK. This turned into a scheme for the highly paid to create tax losses through these partnerships which didn’t actually produce films in any meaningful way.
These schemes were used by footballers (and rock stars and actors, etc) the length and breadth of the country. These would also not generally be facilitated by the Club though, their agents and financial advisors would do all of this.
A similar scenario existed in the early 2000s through the exploitation of Llps and the 100% capital allowance for technology investments – a provision made to boost IT investment in the UK but again exploited by the rich.
However, the writing was on the wall for these old schemes when the Discounted Options Scheme and subsequent Employee Benefit Trusts were set up. The closing of existing loopholes would have been the driver behind it. The new schemes were known to be pushing the boundaries and HMRCs attitude to these sorts of schemes were well known, I don’t believe many (if any) of the big firms were involved in these beyond the narrow remit where they were actually valid.
@auldheid – two ls in skullduggery 😉
It’s a good time to be an Ayr United fan. We sit proudly at the top of Division 1 and could be heading back to our rightful place (the Championship). If things go the right way, we could win the 2002 League Cup which we were cheated out of 4-0. If only the Ayrshire Cup was still on the go, we might be heading for a glorious treble!
Good Morning.
I said elsewhere yesterday that we should ignore a lot of the rubbish and knee jerk commentary coming from the MSM following the release of the Court of Session verdict in the Big Tax Case.
Already this morning, we have started to see how this case may or may not be taken further forward and how it may serve or threaten the interests of the business community who specialise and make a fortune from selling aggressive tax savings schemes to the multinational business community.
In 2011, I wrote an article for CQN Magazine called Bums on Seats. It surrounded a meeting I had with a financial football fixer in London who had previously acted for the boards of Manchester United, Portsmouth and others.
At that meeting, he told me that during his ultimately unsuccessful attempts to negotiate tax bills away for Portsmouth FC, he was told by representatives of HMRC that they would not take any kind of discounted payment and that they were going to pursue a major football club to the death with a no holds barred, no compromise nor give any quarter approach.
That football club was Rangers FC.
The argument then was that they had Rangers bang to rights because the admnistration of the tax scheme cocerned was woeful. If anything, amateurish.
HMRC really wnated to chase those who were bigger and better at the EBT game – especially those within football. Arsenal, Chelsea and others were major targets and Rangers was to be the weak link that would send out the message that the EBT footballing days were over.
In the inetreim period, anyone who has read “The Secret Footballer” will know that there are numerous ex premier players who have been declared bankrupt as a result of the tax man coming to call years after they stopped playing.
Many others, however, are still living high on the hog as a result of earning many thousands of pounds per week duing their careers.
A surprising number of ex footballers are now technically living in such tax free havens as Dubai and elsewhere because that was where their trusts or funds were registered.
One of the big debates among the “tax” fraternity this morning will be whether or not this case should be appealed. I have already heard one expert tax barrister saying that it must be appealed and that the grounds of appeal are “obvious”.
This does not surprise me and it has nothing to do with Rangers. It has everything to do with preserving the very lucrative tax avoidance industry.
When you sign up to one of these schemes you pay a very heavy fee and it normally includes the legal fees up to the stage we have just reached. However once you go to the House of Lords or The Supreme Court as it now is, the client has to shell out for the heavy London fees and these will be VERY expensive.
You are also told that in any such scheme, there is every chance that HMRC will come gunning at some point to close a loophole and that they will not spare any effort and run the case to the very end. You are warned at the outset that no matter how good the advice, how expert the advisers, and how tight the scheme might be, there is still the chance that HMRC and the Government will challenge it or even close it by way of legislation and at that point you have to pay!
In other words you are taking a huge risk.
To that extent, you are warned again that you MUST adminsiter the scheme perfectly and to the letter. If you don’t you will put the whole scheme in jeopardy and that guarantees, such as they are, from the tax advisers such as Baxendale Walker etc will be void because you, the client, ballsed it up.
In that case you are on your own.
Yesterday’s judgement will exercise the tax guys and the knee jerk reaction will be that this must be appealed otherwise it will be used as a stick to beat many others over the head — and that is the message that HMRC was very quick to get out and into the press.
However, I don’t necessarily buy that.
For a start, who is going to appeal? All the companies involved have gone bust and the liquidators concerned will not pay for a supreme court fight.
The directors of the companies who administered the fiasco – well they might have good reason to want to appeal but will they stump up the cash or will they settle? My guess is that Sir Minty will pay his personal tax quietly and move on. He has had ample time to salt away a tax reserve.
I will leave how HMRC might go about collecting the tax for another post.
However, you can put the kettle on for the tax avoidance community throwing this case under the bus.
They may well initially say this needs appealed and then will backtrack.
Why?
Well because a decision from the Inner House of the Court of Session is persuasive but it is not absolutely binding. It is appealable and is not the Big Bertha that HMRC were looking for …. yet!!
If it goes to the Supreme Court and yestreday’s judgement is ratified, then HMRC are really on a role.
But if it doesn’t it leaves the tax specialists wriggle room for their other cases.
These guys don’t give a shit about piddly wee companies such as Rangers – they are more concerned with companies that have salted away far more with schemes like these and it is those companies and clients that they will seek to protect.
On that basis, they will take the view that a judgement from the Court of Session is a pain in the arse but it is not a huge gun. They will not want this to go to the Supreme Court as once there it is a winner take all scenario and tax lawyers don’t like those.
HMRC will be keen to go to the Supreme Court as they have literally nothing to lose as these guys are escaping the tax as it is and so a ruling can only benefit HMRC. But an appeal is not in their hands.
Further, the tax guys — if they were choosing to go to the Supreme Court — will want to go with the best and tightest case possible. One where all the admin was perfect and where the directors locked and bolted every door to protect the scheme.
Heidi Poon and the judgement yesterday makes it plain that this is no such case. Sir Minty and his directors obfuscated, lied, deceived and crapped their way around this scheme. There should have been no side letters, side agreements or recorded contracts that implicate and scupper any tax scheme. In other words Mity and crew cocked it up by being amateurs.
In short, the tax guys would be prepared to throw Minty and MIH etc under the bus rather than have this go to the next stage.
They will also counsel their own clients on “risk management” on outstanding schemes. They may suggest some quick early compromise deals with HMRC and armed with the decision from Edinburgh, HMRC may well cut some folk some slack as they are under pressure to get at least some tax in.
I was always told, pick your fights most carefully and that sometimes the last thing that lawyers want is a decision. Grey areas are there for a reason.
We are at the stage with the taxman where Rangers and MIH don’t matter any more as there are other fish to fry.
Lastly, if there is no appeal, then don’t believe for a minute that the ex players and managers are safe.
I believe that once the liquidators of Rangers PLC confirm that they cannot or will not pay the outstanding tax in full, then the ultimate beneficiaries will be getting the knock.
Many of them had their agents draw up letters of indemnity whereby Rangers PLC and MIH indemnified them against the tax ever becoming payable.
Unfortunately, MIH is no more, Murray has bolted, Rangers PLC is bust and of course the venture being carried on out of Ibrox is a separate and distinct legal entity.
In other words the indemnities are worth nothing.
Time to raid the piggy bank — if you have one?
For those who are interested, here are some comments from afar on the judgement and the sporting consequences.
http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/article/rangers-lose-tax-case-replay/592377
One of the things that bugged me about the EBT situation was Stuart Cosgrove’s (forced?) apology to Rangers fans on Off the Ball, after one of the appeals. Having been critical, he suddenly sounded very sheepish. The apology didn’t acknowledge Rangers accepted culpability in some instances of EBT use/abuse, nor the admission in respect of the DOS setup.
Stuart comes across as a genuine guy who would apologise where he got something wrong (he has done so in other matters on the show). He also comes across as intelligent enough to understand his apology was somewhat misplaced which leads me to believe he’d ‘been telt’ by BBC Scotland to make the statement (possibly for personal safety reasons as we were on Red Alert for social unrest). A further appeal notwithstanding, what chance a retraction of the apology and Tam to take the view the whole cheating episode/saga is water under the bridge and just to get on with the fitba?
Yesterday’s announcement only changes the number of times Rangers cheated, not that they did or didn’t.
broganrogantrevinoandhogan 5th November 2015 at 12:31 pm #For those who are interested, here are some comments from afar on the judgement and the sporting consequences.
http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/article/rangers-lose-tax-case-replay/592377
====================
The analysis from Rob Wilson makes no sense, unless he’s become an unwitting victim of the myth.
There can be no ongoing sanctions as the club no longer exists. The only punishment possible is retrospective, and it would involve expunging all their results from the relevant competitions.
BRTH – good point regarding who exactly might appeal the CS decision. I heard a tax lawyer on GMS today saying he thought it would be overturned on appeal. However, there first has to be an appeal, and I agree that it is not clear who has the interest and the means to mount one.
Regarding the CS Judgment, isn’t this what many have speculated HMRC wanted all along?
Much has been made of how in the FTT(T) HMRC did not seek to show that the EBTs and loans were a sham, and this seemed to hurt their case at that stage.
However with the latest judgment, the principle of redirecting of earnings was the crucial difference from the FTT decision. This is a much easier concept to use when pursuing tax, as it is generally at the single point where the employer makes a payment in lieu of wages, and it doesn’t really matter what form it takes.
Pursuing tax where the validity of trusts, loans, and any other form that might be an emolument down to each individual level seems much more complex (and tedious) than simply having to show the employer paid an employee for services as part of their employment while neglecting to pay tax & NIC.
If HMRC have established that it is at the point the employer directs money or equivalent in the general direction of an employee (maybe not quite the legal definition!) that tax becomes due, they have simplified the collection of taxes a great deal when pursuing all manner of avoidance wheezes.
STVGrant and Gerry McCulloch obfuscating common sense on behalf of cheats on Twitter e.g. “how do you know Rangers wouldn’t still have bought the same players without EBTs?”. A bit depressing as those two were previously partial to a lamb diet but today have gone full succulent
Wottpi 5th November 2015 at 11:29 am # A View From Gorgie pointing out that the SPFL has precedent for retrospective points deduction in current seasons for tax defaulting in previous seasons.
Even if, as has been said, the SFA/SPFL have their lawyers looking at the BTC decision it is hard to conceive that they will do anything (unless spherical objects were in a vice and a sharp blade by the throat) to take the trophies away from the liquidated club.
But would it not give them a chance to state categorically that the old club died, and their trophies with it, and that the new club (Sevco/Rangers/Glasgow or whatever) is the holder of a few lower league trophies since 2012. At least that would put the OC/NC debate to bed and give them a chance of setting the records straight. It then avoids the mess that would result from stripping titles – may not be the ultimate but at least a start!
However I agree with the Gorgie view that if there has been a precedent (Livingston) where one club came clean and was still deducted points and fined then it could be argued that the offence times 8 is entirely appropriate. However, because the offending club did not come clean and deliberately lied and withheld information one could probably argue that times 8 is insufficient.
If those at Hampden had the gonads to actually do something as long these lines, AND (given the accounts just released) request a bank guarantee to ensure they had the funds to complete the season and not cause disruption to all the other clubs, then it might just show that the rules are being applied in a fair and transparent way across the board – Messrs Doncaster and Regan please take note.
There was an interesting post about Alloa going to the crumbledome this weekend – yes they may not be in the best of form but perhaps their Board (and all the other clubs Boards as well)should be asking the powers that be why they are being required to play a team that is being treated differently to the other 41 clubs – especially now with them having been found to have cheated/lied etc.
A fine (and I see it as irrelevant as to whether or not DCK can afford it) and a forty point deduction, with possibly another 15 for going into another administration to come, might just make those from Gretna, Livingston, and many others feel a whole lot better.
Scottish Football needs a strong East fife and Arbroath, as well as proper administrators.
Auldheid posted it earlier, but it has of course slipped off the page and down the screen, but this article
https://www.theoffshoregame.net/rangers-lose-the-big-tax-case-what-now/
is a pretty concise summary of the CS judgment yesterday and well worth a read if you can’t face the full judgment, available here, anyway.
Night Terror 5th November 2015 at 1:28 pm
That particular argument is so obvious that I have always been surprised their case was not based on it.
It’s almost as if they chose not to use it until they got to a level where a judgement in their favour actually meant something.
There’s also the issue of the “Ramsay Priniple” which basically says (and I have copied and pasted this)
“The House of Lords decided that where a transaction has pre-arranged artificial steps that serve no commercial purpose other than to save tax, the proper approach is to tax the effect of the transaction as a whole.”
and from the ruling
“… with the result that the amount paid into the sub-trust is treated as at the absolute disposal of the employee and hence part of his emoluments or earnings.”
It’s little wonder the CoS talked about “common sense”. This was avoidance pure and simple. It couldn’t be more blatant.
The one difference that I can see is that in the Livingston decision as far as I can recall there was a tax assessment made which Livingston then didn’t pay due to simple lack of funds, and owned up to as much.
With RFC, SPECIFICALLY REGARDING THE BTC, there was no assessment to pay (not least because HMRC hadn’t been given the information to assess and couldn’t rely on the SFA records as they were incomplete) so the situation was slightly different.
There is however a very interesting triangle to be seen now with the long admitted WTC liability which CW took personal flak for but I don’t think the club was punished?, the SPFL fine (against oldco but conferred on newco by virtue of the undisclosed 5WA) and the apparently highly secretive disciplinary hearing of late last month.
They actually don’t need the BTC to make the case that Gorgie makes.
Edit: Does this not go back to the disrepute charges that floated around in and out of court for a while?
sickofitall 5th November 2015 at 11:45 am
I gave you a thumbs up because I believe there should be recognition that the titles were won by cheating.
It should not all be about a campaign of title stripping. It is a campaign of righting wrongs.,.. All of them !
There are wider issues at large, namely the governance that allowed it to advance unchecked, the governance that allowed the accused entrance into the game via secret agreements, the governance that withheld information and allowed self investigation in an attempt to be seen to keep their hands clean, the governance that discarded its own rules of governance, and continues to do so. I will cut it short
The games governors.
Minutes of all shareholder meetings must be made public.
We need to know WTF went on and on whose say so.
In the interests of accuracy – always the forte on here – I had a quick check back and ref the Livingston tax case, an assessment hadn’t actually been made. Instead I understand it transpired that one of their Directors had made bonus payments to various players over a period of time that SHOULD have been subject to assessment. Livingston stated when they came clean that they were in the process of assessing the liability.
as you were.
It makes the background, discussions and outcomes of 29-30 October 2015 between (new variant found in the DR) “King’s Rangers” and the SPFL disciplinary bods all the more intriguing.
Smugas 5th November 2015 at 1:59 pm
Hear what you say and follow the logic.
However re the BTC HMRC must have presented the club with some from of tax liability to get the whole appeal process rolling?
Mibbes aye, mibbies naw.
Hopefully someone can help clarify.
Homunculus 5th November 2015 at 1:45 pm #
‘….It’s little wonder the CoS talked about “common sense”. This was avoidance pure and simple. It couldn’t be more blatant.’
_______
And what a blessing the good Dr Poon did not simply roll over in aquiescence with the other two clearly less able lawyers, but tore their facile, glib and patronising reasoning apart!
If she had rolled over, then perhaps it would have become a remote, abstract fight between HMRC and MG.
But her efforts allowed us to see the rubbishy, amateurish, almost ‘let’s- kid- on- we’re knowledgeable- about- the- law-not that-it-matters’ approach adopted by her less able chairman and the other winger.
An approach that was insulting to us all.
I reckon that the SFM should send a ‘thank you’ ,on behalf of us all ,to Dr Poon for the enormous trouble she clearly went to to arrive at a properly reasoned and argued dissenting decision. If the majority decision had been as carefully detailed and comprehensive, who knows, we might have had, however reluctantly, to accept it.
John Clark 5th November 2015 at 2:44 pm
Well said sir.
I said at the time of the FTTT result the trouble with the law and some of its practitioners is that they get so wrapped up in trying to find the one flaw, loophole, technicality to get the decision they want, need or require to show themselves as being a smarty pants that they fail to see what is staring them square in the face.
Nothing wrong with in certain circumstances that but at times you wonder if it is a default setting.
Tommo saying the BTC verdict has been passed to SFA legals. I don’t see any loop holes in it. Can anybody else?
The LNS decision has been over-ruled in law. T’Rangers used a tax system unavailable to any other “Honest” club.
Was that another 4″ by 2″, I heard being wedged against the bunker door?
https://twitter.com/alextomo/status/662193096046862336
wottpi 5th November 2015 at 2:34 pm
==================================
Yes, HMRC would have raised assessments, those would have included the tax due, plus interest from the time it should have been paid, plus penalties depending on how helpful the club had been.
As I understand it the unpaid tax was based on payments of around £47m. However the final bill was something like £72m.
HMRC’s total claim as a creditor is £94m. That is based on the small tax case, the big tax case and the amounts Rangers stole when Whyte was in charge.
Sixth floor Hampden, earlier today:
“Bryson, when you get a moment, check that CoS judgement to see if we’re in the poop at all!”
Two minutes later:
“Checked it Mr. Regan, sir; they’ve made the error of putting yesterday’s date on it, so we’ve no responsibility prior to that date, because that’s when we found out that EBTs are no good. Vindicates Cammy’s position completely. No retroactive action required, sir!”
“Excellent, Bryson! Now fetch my slippers…”
As regards the question of revisiting the LNS decision, surely what is now required is for the Compliance Officer to lay new charges against RFC (in liquidation) of wilfully witholding evidence from the LNS commission.
Here is an excerpt from a Scotsman article of 9 January regarding Livingston-
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/livingston-set-to-face-disciplinary-action-1-3656741#axzz3qcrLdqHy
If it is a rule breach to provide false and misleading information, then surely this applies to RFC (IL) in respect of its submissions to LNS. The other charges seem to have a certain relevance as well.
Since these are fresh charges, a new panel would have to be convened.
From the Scotsman article, again-
As I understand it, that membership still exists and was transferred to Sevco (Scotland ) Ltd in 2012 as part of the 5 way agreement, So the sanction is still available.
Perhaps I should make a complaint to the Compliance Officer.
I believe that this is not correct.
Assessments would have been raised, and off the top of my head these may have been as early as 2008.
I believe the sequence would have been:
– HMRC raise assessment
– Rangers accept assessment on STC
– Rangers appeal BTC
All of this happened before Whyte takeover.
– Eventually goes to tribunal, Rangers get partial win on BTC
– Tribunal appeal in Rangers favour
– Yesterday’s victory for HMRC
neepheid 5th November 2015 at 3:53 pm # As I understand it, that membership still exists and was transferred to Sevco (Scotland ) Ltd in 2012 as part of the 5 way agreement, So the sanction is still available. Perhaps I should make a complaint to the Compliance Officer.
…………………………………………………………………………
Was it not transferred to Dundee?
(My memory is not always great…)
The umpteen way agreement was a wholly different magical transaction.
I was pondering the events of yesterday and the line which seems to be being pushed that there is no appetite/need/benefit to revisiting the titles acquired by Rangers during the period when they were evading tax.
Or cheating as most people would, and have, put it.
The Court decision yesterday concerned the tax years 2001/2002 to 2008/09.
Let’s stick a pin slap bang in the middle of that time frame and see if anything of note happened.
22nd May 2005. A.K.A. Helicopter Sunday.
Hibernian v Rangers. Rangers won 1-0 and thereby won the Scottish Premier League.
Team EBT
Ronald Wattereus £ 510,000
Thomas Buffel £1,200,000
Dado Prso £1,900,000
Sotirios Kyrgiakos £ 532,200
Nacho Novo £1,200,000
Shota Arveladze £?
Marvin Andrews £ 316,025
Barry Ferguson £2,500,000
Fernando Ricksen £ 684,225
Michael Ball £1,400,000
Alex Rae £ 569,000
Substitutes
Allan McGregor £?
Chris Burke £ 55,000
Ross McCormack £?
Steven Smith £ 7500
Robert Malcolm £ 125,000
Peter Lovenkrands £ 902,000
Steven Thompson £ 485,000
Manager
Alex McLeish £1,700,000
First Team Coach
Jan Wouters £ 285,000
Chairman
David Murray £6,300,000
Vice Chairman
John McClelland £ 225,000
Chief Executive
Martin Bain £ 249,000
Company Secretary
Campbell Ogilvie £ 95,000
Head Of Football Administration
Andrew Dickson £ 33,000
—————-
£21,272,950
Doping is doping whether it be pharmaceutical or financial.
We are being fed the line that there is no reason to revisit the outcome of financial doping.
On the basis of one game in the middle of the thick end of a decade of financial doping I can think of more than twenty one million reasons not only why it should be revisited but why it must be.
fishnish 5th November 2015 at 4:05 pm #neepheid 5th November 2015 at 3:53 pm # As I understand it, that membership still exists and was transferred to Sevco (Scotland ) Ltd in 2012 as part of the 5 way agreement, So the sanction is still available. Perhaps I should make a complaint to the Compliance Officer. …………………………………………………………………………
Was it not transferred to Dundee?
==============
That was the share in the SPL. The SFA membership was definitely transferred to Sevco (Scotland) Ltd. Both transfers were part of the five way agreement, in fact the transfer of the SFA membership was conditional on the prior transfer of the SPL share. Unless my memory has really gone the walk- which is possible!
Just catching up…well some of us have to work..
……Who the hell do these Journalists ( I use the term VERY loosely ) Think they are telling us that Nothing should happen regarding yesterdays HMRC result !!!!! Why ?? because it suits your agenda !!!! Unbelievable do they really think we give a damn about their warped corrupt minds right now. We have known that we have been getting cheated and lied to for years, yesterday was confirmation of what every football fan the length and breadth of Scotland Knew ( yes even Rangers fans in pretendy denial ) The game has been broken since Murray went down the EBT route and hid the side letters . Your time has passed …move along , its now time to sweep all the corruptness out , strip titles and have it forever known that a team cheated the whole of scottish football so that it can never be allowed to happen again AND finally move on . Hopefully with some form of Rangers ran by Rangers fans and with fans interest at heart . It is a goddam sport after all. Just hope that we bampots and the clubs now see this through to the end and give us our game back.
I was coming at it from a slightly different perspective ZT.
The WTC liability is beyond doubt hence my comment that the (undisclosed btw – we still only know about it, ironically, from the RFC accounts) 29-30th little cosy get together was on thin ice even without the BTC result.
[and to be clear by thin ice I mean close to the borders of a debate on OC/NC which they obviously don’t want to have]
With regards to the Big Tax Case but talking in the broadest of terms, given the amounts involved, I would expect a system to exist whereby a club could go to the SFA and say here’s the assessment, we don’t think its right and have hence appealed it and would seek to state that safe in the knowledge that the response wouldn’t be “here’s your fine, here’s your points deduction, pay your tax (thus suppressing your hard pressed liquidity further) and come back and see us if your appeal is successful.” That’s simply not workable.
The difference, as I tried to elaborate in my subsequent post, is that Livingston were not disputing and hence were coming clean on an accepted liability and were simply waiting on its quantum.
The BTC is probably not the best example to use for my argument I accept. Firstly the shere magnitude of the debt reflected the industrial scale of its use and made any outcome likely to be one extreme or the other (well it did when the real life liquidation extreme was thought to exist). Secondly, we had a situation where the appellant knowing full well he was potentially in the crap wasn’t appealing at all, in fact he was sitting on his hands doing sod all hoping the bad men would all go away. Strangely though, the appeal body were doing exactly the same thing.
There are similarities, and IMHO sufficient similarities for there to be a case to answer, but its not quite the apples and apples that Gorgie presents it as.
neepheid 5th November 2015 at 4:15 pm # fishnish 5th November 2015 at 4:05 pm #neepheid 5th November 2015 at 3:53 pm # As I understand it, that membership still exists and was transferred to Sevco (Scotland ) Ltd in 2012 as part of the 5 way agreement, So the sanction is still available. Perhaps I should make a complaint to the Compliance Officer. …………………………………………………………………………Was it not transferred to Dundee? ============== That was the share in the SPL. The SFA membership was definitely transferred to Sevco (Scotland) Ltd. Both transfers were part of the five way agreement, in fact the transfer of the SFA membership was conditional on the prior transfer of the SPL share. Unless my memory has really gone the walk- which is possible!
……………………………………………………..
Fairy Nuff.
Sorry for the distraction. 🙂
John Clark.
We are now incorporated 🙂
BP
suggest time for new post “Who won Scottish League Cup in 2002?”…… Players can keep their medals – but clubs should get trophies if they did not cheat.
Ayr united would be first major trophy in their history…..
OK, so yesterday’s huge stories in Scottish football have not as yet registered on either the SFA or the SPFL’s websites.
So mibbees Regan and Doncaster are in the Hampden bunker – and if McRae is not snoozing mibbees he has been tasked with making the tea ?
So how do you handle this latest clusterf*** around the Ibrox club ?
1) Stay in the bunker, don’t answer the phone: say nothing.
might have tricky questions. Might have to say something.
Might be a bit difficult to achieve, what with t’internet on meltdown, and even the SMSM providing a lot of coverage. Even the normally compliant journalists
2) Issue a statement saying that the titles will/will not be stripped.
Well that’s just not going to happen !
Too soon, and will never be able to leave the bunker if they question the validity of the RFC titles at this juncture, etc.
3) Kick it into the long grass !
How about issuing a bland, ‘holding’ statement: we are digesting the info. / too soon to comment / we’ll get back to you ASAP…[aye right!].
Fully expect a non-statement [joint ?] from Regan/Doncaster, saying nothing of consequence…and demanding time to ‘review’ recent events.
Big Pink 5th November 2015 at 4:26 pm #
‘John Clark.We are now incorporated ‘
_______
Superb! Well done.
@StevieBC
Holding Statement is actually undoubtedly the correct response and it really should have happened already.
Notwithstanding that the possibility of these events coming to pass should have already been considered at some level by the governing bodies they do need to read the material fully and consider its implications. An immediate reaction (either way) to it would not be appropriate.
Something along the lines of “We have seen the verdict and will read the detailed judgement and consider whether any further action is required at an appropriate future date”
John Clark 5th November 2015 at 5:08 pm #Big Pink 5th November 2015 at 4:26 pm #‘John Clark.We are now incorporated ‘_______Superb! Well done.
………………..
Chapeau ???
DJ I am an Ayr fan like you but I disagree to Ayr getting the LC 2002. Rangers were due to be disqualified from every cup that they took part in from the minute they kicked off their first round game. The fact they made it to finals and won them made that particular cup null and void IMO
Leagues are different, everybody plays each other once and no advantage was gained by any other club over the rest, but in the cups those who avoided Rangers were in theory gaining to those who had to face them.
http://www.uefa.org/news/newsid=2301774.html
ERM I’m just wondering who from the SFA is at.this fitba and the lawjamboreee ?Apposite surely.
rabtdog 5th November 2015 at 9:35 am #
===========
Rabtdog,
My thoughts were of course really mean to be directed at the rather large group of Scottish mainstream sports journo’s who have failed us all so badly in their reportage of this particular omnishambles.
There just seem so many of them, and in so many relatively large media outlets. And they are given a platform to repeat whatever nonsense they like – or so it seems to me.
In my sheer anger at this last night, I let these unworthy characters rather obscure the efforts of many other journalists working hard and honestly I am sure.
So I do apologise unreservedly for my little outburst both to yourself and any other decent journalists who may be reading the blog, and indeed to the whole blog community as a whole.
Feeling calmer today 🙂
Ogilvie must be breathing a long sigh of relief, having left the SFA before this HMRC win.
As a – belatedly – self-declared recipient himself of an EBT, [but only to the value of a ‘good night out’ costing c.GBP 90K (c) Chick Young], the ex-SFA President might have had to take some honourable action if he had still been in post.
That’s my wee joke for today !
SSB what a hoot!!
Saying it is unfair for the media to ask Warburton to comment on recent developments down Ibrox way.
The magic hat wearer side stepped the issue by saying he (rightly IMHO) concentrates on the football side only and anyway he isn’t qualified and not smart enough to comment on such matters.
The laugh being with his City Trading experience he is probably the first manager of a Scottish club who has a decent understanding of financial matters and the likes. Meanwhile the gardener was given plenty column inches to wax lyrical as if an expert on all subjects and blow his dog whistle any time he wanted.
A poor night for Celtic but here is something to maybe lighten the Bhoys heavy mood.
From 2012
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2161850/Rangers-crisis-Dave-King-apologises.html
‘I think we should be sorry – and I certainly am sorry,’ King told Sportsmail. ‘We owe both the Rangers fans and the Scottish footballing public an apology.
‘Some of the representations made have betrayed more of a victim status. But I think somebody needs to apologise.
‘Clearly, that is not for Charles Green to do. But I am happy to say that I really believe we should be saying sorry and I think there is something to be sorry about.
‘And as a former director when these things were going on, I am minded to do so.
‘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.
‘I know that the Murray Group might not say that, because it might be tantamount to admitting it.
‘But I am happy to say it as a director of the football club. And, having been there for the last couple of days, and getting a sense of the anger and anxiety, that it is absolutely appropriate for the previous regime to be sorry.’
andygraham.66 – cant agree that 2002 CUP is null and void – just cos Rangers were cheating… cheats should not prosper – why should other teams be punished cos rangers played first game in an illegal manner. Teams played before with illegal players – did not void those touranments…..
Runners-up got there fair and square – and deserve honour – and its an honour ayr deserve – since after 100+ years not won anything major…
Its sport we need to recognise the smaller teams and allow them to win something…… or else.
Can we have thread on “Who won 2002 Scottish League Cup?” as got 22 up votes…. and just 1 down.
dj7 5th November 2015 at 8:18 pm #andygraham.66 – cant agree that 2002 CUP is null and void – just cos Rangers were cheating… cheats should not prosper – why should other teams be punished cos rangers played first game in an illegal manner. Teams played before with illegal players – did not void those touranments….. Runners-up got there fair and square – and deserve honour – and its an honour ayr deserve – since after 100+ years not won anything major… Its sport we need to recognise the smaller teams and allow them to win something…… or else. Can we have thread on “Who won 2002 Scottish League Cup?” as got 22 up votes…. and just 1 down.
————–
But you also have to consider the teams who lost in the previous rounds to Rangers as well. They have also been cheated. That’s where the competition unravels and why a ‘void’ result is fairest all round.
As at posting time – as far as the SFA & SPFL websites ‘news’ sections are concerned, nothing seems to have happened yesterday in Scottish football wrt TRFC !
And that is what is so annoying.
At times of speculation / confusion etc. for any major aspect of Scottish football – the fans, [aka the paying punters], should be able to go straight to the SFA or SPFL site to get some direction or even update.
The fact that neither site is even acknowledging that something significant has happened, [i.e. the Going Concern on the RIFC accounts, and the HMRC win], just smacks of the blazers continuing to be well out of touch with their customers.
And any ‘unnamed sources’ from Hampden passing info to the SMSM will just be treating ALL Scottish football fans with utter contempt, IMO.
Where is the leadership ?
Relax Celtic fans all is not lost. You just need some better players than you can afford. Here’s an idea. Why not find some fancy tax lawyers and invest in an extremely risky (but very profitable) tax strategy?
You’ll be able to afford better players than your current safe and prudent strategy allows and (this is the best bit) even if you get caught, the guys that implement it will still keep their own tax free cash without legal or financial penalty! Brilliant.
And there’s more! Although it is a wee bit cheaty, well okay, a big bit cheaty, the Club won’t be penalised in any way regarding anything you win (you might be asked to pay some tax back – though there are ways to avoid that too!).
Come on Peter, what are you waiting for?
Radio Scotland were working a similar vein last night as well.
By that logic Lance Armstrong is owed a large apology and all his TDF titles back – because no one can prove he wouldn’t have won them without cheating..
Which of course is nonsense.
Its utterly ridiculous to suggest that cheating the rules doesn’t matter if we can’t be sure what would have happened if they hadn’t broken the rules.
Frankly who cares what might have happened if they hadn’t broken the rules. The fact is they did cheat and were awarded a number of trophies while undertaking that cheating.
Smugas/ Wottpi
The big tax case bills or determinations as they were called starting dropping though the Ibrox letter box in Feb/March/April 2008.
Around that same time RFC spent circa £10m net to buy and wage the players that won 3 iar.
They had a net spend of around £25m but that was offset by sale of players. Hutton might have been one.
That is when SDM and WS started to play Russian roulette with the club increasing debt from £6m to £31m and becoming so dependent on CL money for survival the game became in Craig Levein’s words “all about Rangers” with bizarre refereeing decisions the common factor which triggered his tirade.
The bullets in the form of Malmo and Marino finally stopped the cylinder twirling in 2011 and killed RFC.
SDM and WS though loaded the gun in 2008 with the tax bills occupying a couple more positions in the cylinder, shortening the odds of survival further….
Only managed listened to the game on the radio tonight but by the sounds of it Molde put in a good shift and had passages of play when they were passing the ball around like Barcelona.
I took pelters for it after commenting after the first game but when is exactly a good time to raise the fact that our champions have been beaten twice by a team, captained by a goal scoring 40 year old and currently lying sixth in the Norwegian League with one game to go in their 30 match season.
To put in in perspective (and no offense intended) last years sixth place Premiership team was Dundee and the team currently occupying that slot this season is Hamilton.
The other week it was the plastic pitch and the rain. What were the issues tonight?
Please believe me – this is not a Celtic thing – it is a problem for the whole of Scottish Football both at club and international level being that Norway (Population 5 million) managed to get a Euro Play-off spot by being one point (19) behind Croatia (20) and five off the group winner Italy (24).
How and when are we going to make progress on developing homegrown talented players that can do a half decent job in European competition. Over the last few seasons all our representatives have been found out against relative minnows of the European game who just seem to be generally quicker and more skillful.
For whats its worth I think Deila has the right idea but for some reason the execution of plans is poor when it comes to the Euro nights.
I’m even in favour of the wearer of the magic hat trying to develop and bring on guys like Barry McKay, who was out in the cold with the Gardener was in charge, even if it is with a view to sell the player on in the future.
However something is seriously wrong with our inability to develop and have a conveyor belt of the type of quality of player required for today’s modern European game.
At present I know how we got into this mess but I don’t have any answers on how to sort it and wish I did.
wottpi 5th November 2015 at 9:30 pm #
‘..but when is exactly a good time to raise the fact that our champions have been beaten twice by a team, captained by a goal scoring 40 year old and currently lying sixth in the Norwegian League with one game to go in their 30 match season.’
________
A really good time would be when justice is done, and
-Scottish football is cleansed of the poison of untruth and partisan governance,
-SDM is stripped of his knighthood,
-RFC is stripped of dishonourably ‘won’ titles and trophies,
– the Football authorities apologise for their disgraceful ‘Armageddon’ bullying and harrying of the rest of the cheated professional clubs, and for the disgraceful accommodation of a brand new CLUB, not a new owner of an existing club in the secret 5-Way Agreement,
-and apologise for ridiculously considering a fraud merchant as being a ‘fit and proper person to have anything to do with the running of a Scottish football Club, however new it might be.
When that happens, we can concentrate on the beautiful game one hundred percent.
In my opinion.
Been out and about tonight so didn’t see the Celtic game.
Heard quite a few pundits harping on about them being in a 1 team league and how things may improve next season when Rangers are ‘back’.
Gets annoying after a bit
ianagain 5th November 2015 at 6:31 pm #
‘..ERM I’m just wondering who from the SFA is at.this fitba and the lawjamboreee ?Apposite surely.’
_____
There were,it seems , only 24 participants. I have just emailed the UEFA chaps to ask whether there was any Scottish representation ( 5000 euro fee, excluding travel and accommodation costs, and , of course, the cost of the participants’ time away from work)
It doesn’t appear to be a jamboree for blazers, only for lawyers working broadly in the field of law as it relates to football in Europe vis-a-vis commercial, contractual, national and European law.
What I don’t know is whether the SFA has its in-house legal bods ( other than perhaps the Compliance Officer).
I see a lovely picture of an ‘SFA Lawyer’ giving a presentation on ‘The Bryson Approach’ to legal principle.
John Clark 5th November 2015 at 10:29 pm #
John, I don’t think I have ever disagreed with any of your posts, but as regards your post at the above time, I have never agreed more.
Over the last two or three years, I have confided to a few fellow supporters that I have been slowly emotionally withdrawing from the game.
Following yesterday’s confirmation of what we all knew to be the truth, Celtic’s performance and result tonight leaves me practically unmoved.
Don’t like losing, will always support my team, but until justice has been done and seen to be done, I don’t see the point in the Game in Scotland any more.
The fact that I feel so sanguine about tonight’s game, suggests that after 65 years of support, the games a bogey.
Bill1903 5th November 2015 at 10:50 pm #
‘Heard quite a few pundits harping on about them being in a 1 team league and how things may improve next season when Rangers are ‘back’.’
_______
Maybe there is another Baxendale-Walker priming DK ,even as we speak ,on a super-duper tax ‘avoidance’ scheme which will free up a few million to enable the new club to begin to be ‘competitive’ in the same way that the disgraced, liquidated club was?
I have often thought it rather a shame that, whereas lawyers can be struck off and banned from exercising their profession, there is no similar sanction on football hacks or pundits for abusing, misusing, the ( mercifully now reducing) ‘power’ they have to lie, distort truth, and propagandise at will .
Such hacks are the excrement on the excrement on the shoes of people of any kind of integrity.
Wipe them off your shoes, do not buy or subscribe to their newspapers, do not get annoyed, but pity their children who will grow up wishing their dads had been Baxendale-Walker types rather than false journalists!
wottpi 5th November 2015 at 9:30 pm
You make good points.
Where do you start moving our game forward.
We are not good technically. We are poor at passing. We are poor at movement off the ball.
We have youngsters who break through and are hailed as world class after four games only for them to disappear into obscurity.
Most foreign players that we bring in look different players after four months as if we coach good play out of them.
The media will moan and complain and yet a month after European football exit they will be back using all the superlatives of the day.
This has been the story from the late eighties onwards.
Kids no longer play football in the parks.
Few high schools have football teams.
Clubs, and not just the big ones, hoover up players and then discard the vast majority and yet in the mean time prevent them playing for their schools and youth teams.
Added to the technical ability of foreign teams there seems a greater desire at times.
You mentioned Norway being comparable with Scotland but what is their current ranking?
As a nation we do have an over inflated belief in ourselves. We still think we have the quality of players that we did in the seventies when in reality our current crop is as poor as I can remember. As a nation we need to get real. The pundits talk about spending more money constantly; guys like Chris Sutton who was in the most expensive Celtic team ever assembled and yet had the most appalling away record. Money won’t cure problems but it could make them a lot worse.
As supporters we have no patience. We demand instant success and if we do not get what we want then we want the guys head on a stick. That drives most managers, who lets face it do not want to lose their job, into playing the safe names but not necessary try new talent.
Now it could very well be that countries like Norway have invested in their youth set ups twenty years ago where as in this country we have only been doing it seriously for the last ten to twelve years or so. Sure I know that we have produced good players in the past but football is a constantly evolving sport and what was cutting edge even five years ago is no longer valid.
Perhaps we need to be patient with the processes we have put in and trust that they will deliver.
What I do know is that I have no trust in the SFA to install a worthwhile process as they are a corrupt shambles of an organisation.
ThomTheThim 5th November 2015 at 11:13 pm
‘… I don’t see the point in the Game in Scotland any more..’
_______
ThomTheThim, the whole world is looking at corruption in FIFA, corruption in UEFA, possible corruption in the German FA……
We here can do nothing directly about that .
We can do something about the SFA.
We always could, morally. We knew there was wrong-doing by SDM which was countenanced, supported, defended, or denied as occasion demanded .
Now we know that as a matter of law,t there was serious wrongdoing by SDM.
The game is not a bogey. But our Football administrators have been found out.
And the game can be restored when they are MADE to recognise their contribution to the whole disastrous mess that is now Scottish Football, and accept responsibility for THEIR cheating.
I call upon Alan McCrae to begin the process of cleansing.
And I am morally certain that he will find that the decent men of Scottish football clubs will support him.
Out of principle, certainly.
But also for very pragmatic business reasons.
For if they don’t, they will kill their own businesses as surely, if less dishonourably, as SDM killed his.
Richard Wilson BBC Website
RFC plc were charged with paying an additional £150,000 in costs, and the total of £400,000 was sought by the Scottish Professional Football League (established when the SPL merged with the Scottish Football League) from Rangers International Football Club, the company that now owns and operates Rangers.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
This guy is patronising BBC readers at the tax payer’s expense
He tells us that “Rangers” are owned and operated by RIFC when everybody knows its owned and operated (and is) TRFC Ltd formerly Sevco Scotland
By his logic
The company that owned and operated Rangers during the cheating period was`nt Rangersplc but the Murray Group
So why didn’t they get fined ?
Can’t disagree with that either, John.
However until those actions you mentioned are executed, then the game is a bogey.
A crooked deck. A double headed penny.
Personally, I don’t think the Scottish Establishment would tolerate a light to shine too brightly into the corners.
Sad, but true, I feel.
My negativity, however, is no reason why Scottish football supporters should not push their clubs to the limit, in the effort to cleanse and save the Game.
Haven’t posted a lot this past few months but still an avid reader. I was overnight in Englandshire yesterday and shared a table which faced the TV so I could watch the footie at the invite of a Portuguese (longtime UK resident) and fellow hotel guest. I ended up having a few wines with this stranger and we talked football and work. He was a Plymouth Argyll and Benfica man and of course the inevitable question came up early on ” Do you think Rangers relegation, albeit they are moving up the leagues and will be back in the top division soon has affected Scottish football and You know also Portuguese football is very like Scottish football because we really have the top two/three just like Scotland, but Rangers have been missing so you don’t have the competition”. I replied “I would be happy to comment on that but before we continue I must correct you in what you said because there is the common myth that Rangers were relegated” “were they not ? “nope” I said “the Rangers that you refer to went into liquidation etc etc , we all know the story on here. Annoying as it is we just got to keep making sure the facts are heard.
justshatered 5th November 2015 at 11:39 pm
‘…..What I do know is that I have no trust in the SFA to install a worthwhile process as they are a corrupt shambles of an organisation..’
_______
justhatered, if I can just make what I think is a very important distinction:
on the one hand, there is
-the ‘technical’ question: are our Football governors able to ‘run ‘the technical business of football ? That is, are they spending money wisely and sensibly on developing the talent etc etc that any sport needs, and on marketing the sport…
on the other hand, there is
-the ethical ( or trust) question: are our football administrators prepared, at the drop of a liquidation, to abandon any idea of sporting integrity?
On the first question, I can say I am not at all competent to comment, except to express my admiration for the work the ‘real’ SFA guys and gals do.
On the second question, sadly, I can say only that I believe the answer is ‘yes’.
In other words, the SFA may (or may not) be functioning well in terms of the mechanical running of football.
But they have most certainly not functioned well in terms of the very rationale of Sport : fair and honest competition.
Because of their unbelievable attitude to the cheating of one club, and their eager acceptance of the owners ( whoever the Courts might decide them to have been) of a new club and their endorsement of that new club as being the liquidated club that had cheated the rest of us!
That is, they are untrustworthy, prepared to compromise their personal honesty and integrity, and any good that they may incidentally do ( if indeed they do any good) is vitiated by that fundamental dishonesty.
In my opinion.
A recent somewhat dark and sinister development emanating from the sphere of some of the “Rangers Bloggers” has motivated me to post this.
I noticed a few days ago that the blogger known as John Stevens (@pzj_1) has turned to a new and despicable tactic of posting family and personal details online. Now I seem to recall that this is the individual who was behind the “Celtic Land Deal/State Aid” allegations….
However his new quest would appear to be the unmasking of the other “Rangers Blogger” known as “John James”. The latest “accused” is as far as I am aware just the latest in a string of individuals that John Stevens has accused of being “John James”. However this new development of posting photographs, names and other details of not only the accused individual, but also of other family members, brothers, sisters, parents etc. is shocking to see even for this unhinged character.
Now it seems that those lovey tolerant lot over at the Vanguard Bears have taken some inspiration from John Stevens and began a similar campaign of their own. In fact they have even went to the lengths of posting a three part blog. Now this is really disgusting with all sorts of individuals named and smeared with family photographs posted including children. The crime seems to be as far as I can make out is being employed by HMRC, being somewhat distantly acquainted with friends of Peter Lawell’s family and a few innocuous tweets and Facebook postings that in the eyes of the VB make them part of a “Rangers” hating conspiracy within HMRC all determined to bring down “Rangers”.
Of the damning evidence offered up by the VB is that some people had the audacity to engage in a fancy dress party dressed as “zombies”. This apparently is proof of them being “sickening, bile filled, sectarian bigots” or some other such nonsense.
Of course every sane person knows that John Stevens and the VB are generally unhinged lunatics who until now could be largely ignored as irrelevant. However this new tactic of posting peoples personal details and images online is a very worrying and sinister development.
I would hope that those individuals who have been targeted are consulting their lawyers as this has got to be at the minimum borderline criminal behaviour?
I will not provide the links to this material but it came to my attention through posts on the Bears Den site. The vast majority of replies are fully supporting of the VB and John Stevens with various congratulations offered and several dark hints of violent repercussions to be visited upon some of the targeted individuals. To be fair there are a small number of poster questioning the inclusion of children (adults are no problem it would seem) but they seem to be largely shouted down by the majority. That the mods of the Bears Den allow both the original posts linking the material and the replies to be posted un-moderated is a very poor reflection on the mentality of the people in control of this site.
John Stevens and the Vanguard Bears have shown themselves to be twisted, deranged and possibly dangerous. Action must be taken against them now before this gets out of hand and someone gets hurt. How would one go about reporting this behaviour to the police?
Up to my eyes in a project just now. As I passed ICAS house on the tram, i couldn’t resist a quiet GIRFUY moment.
RTC has been vindicated, common sense has prevailed. A bitter sweet moment, given that some fine comrades did not live to see justice finally , and comprehensively, done.
The ball is now at the feet of the clubs who were cheated. Will they insist that the historical record reflect the “EBT Tax Cheat Years”? Will they finally get off their knees and sort out the football authorities who have been complicit in this for decades?
Sadly not, we will get a few mealy mouthed statements about the past being the past, and how we must all look to the future and the good of football.
Useless, spineless, bar stewards
your heart has to go out to these two qc’s of the majority opinion fttt , stripped of all common sense…… at the time, it appeared they had received heidi’s tome, panicked, met in the smallest room in the house grabbed the nearest sheet of izaal hard and cobbled…..
their tactics of using sham loans and inheritance tax to decide on a paye case seemed well weird at best and now of course we know it lacked common sense…..
ms poons great book is part comedy as well as common sense… the chapter re that paragon of strict tax regimes and financial conduct that is jersey was thrilling….. bergerac came calling to ‘audit’ the original ebt trustee and when ‘ john nettles’ report came out as … ahem…. they decided to go gardening ans spend more time with the family. along comes a willing hilda ogden-crimson to clean up on ‘ coronation drive’ down govan way and 70 odd million quid later…. we eventually arrive at common sense….
simples really..
SFA / SPFL meeting to discuss the latest EBT / Rangers appeal verdict:
Option 1 – they take no retrospective action. Ibroxians happy, WATP mentality confirmed, many fans of of other clubs see no redress for years of cheating, a proportion of those drift away from Scottish football as they project forward and see that nothing will ever change;
Option 2 – they take action to void or amend the results of the affected competitions. Fans of other clubs see that action has been taken to address a historical wrong, and can move on. Ibrox fans rage, a proportion drift away from Scottish football, as they project forward and see that something has shifted;
Option 3 – kick the ball down the road / bring out the Bryson / initiate a review and employ the finest legal minds with the narrowest of remits and limited evidence, and ask them to report (in private if necessary), then initiate a secret agreement. A proportion of fans of all clubs drift away from the game, as they project forward and have no idea what the rules of the sport are supposed to be any more.
I’ve read some comparisons between the Rangers EBT situation and Lance Armstrong being stripped of titles. One major difference is that in pro cycling, there is a very strong chance that many of Armstrong’s closest competitors were also doping, whereas it would appear that in Scottish football, only one club was at the magic financial mushrooms. Therefore their trespassing of the rules is comparatively worse. It should be treated accordingly.
Sorry to prolong the point, I know it won’t be popular and I’m not picking on you per se Tartanwulver but I can assure you that you and others have to get away from “reviewing the EBT situation in light of new information (the latest EBT appeal verdict)” and immediately jumping to a consequence/conclusion of stripping titles in the same breath.
Come at it with that approach and there’s no club, authority or institutional figure will touch it with a barge pole. Wrong, but that is what will happen.
Simply start with the question how did we get to here when we started from there. That should actually carry a general support, from VB’s (ok maybe not the VB’s but certainly a section of the RFC support) to your guy from Benfica.
Good Morning.
If you have a few moments to spare, take a look at this ‘column’ from Derek Johnstone in the Evening Shark-Jump. The single most ridiculous and ill-informed thing I have read about EBTs and the Big Tax Case. It is truly appalling stuff. Printed without a hint of clarification or alternative perspectives by the ‘newspaper’…
http://m.eveningtimes.co.uk/sport/13949546.Derek_Johnstone__The_EBT_saga_will_have_no_bearing_on_Rangers_going_forward__so_lets_hope_we_have_heard_the_end_of_it/?ref=twtrec
Dear me! Enjoy the rest of the day.
The Clumpany
[Still blogging over at https://theclumpany.wordpress.com/%5D