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.
Auldheid 6th November 2015 at 7:03 pm #
BRTH
So you are saying there was a fundamental breach?
================================
There may be a few fundaments involuntarily breached
As a knock on from title stripping, it will follow that they competed in Europe, again by using unfair methods of remuneration to players, in competitions they had no right to be in.
The damage done by David Murray truly is immeasurable. Their contributions to the sport can honestly be considered global.
Auldheid
I never say anything in the interests of brevity.
I say everything in the inetersts of accuracy.
Ballyargus
OBB was shorthand for the Offensive Behavior at Football Bill (somebody please look up correct title Im on my second large bacardi) which is a testimony to legislative stupidity and is driving support away from football by criminalising supporters for behaviour a copper is offended by.
BRTH
Aye but do readers reach the end says the pot to the kettle.?
Extracted from DR / Gary Ralston article today;
“THE Rangers Supporters Trust…
“…the timing of this deal and the subsequent dividend payment are highly questionable and demonstrate more appalling business practice from Sports Direct…
The Sports Direct arrangement remains terrible for Rangers and fans should be aware that any official merchandise purchase, from any retail outlet, is simply strengthening the ability of Mike Ashley to hold our club to ransom.
“We would urge fans not to buy any official merchandise until there is a comprehensive revision of the existing deal.”
======================
A few nuggets there to attract a strongly worded letter from Ashley’s legal team ?
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/an-arranged-marriage-between-rangers.html
If this wee tet a tet by email is true then the baws truly up on the slates and not coming down until answered.
BP did my Paul Baxendale thingy breech some unknown rule? Disappeared twice.
Ex-rangers boss Alex McLeish-(EBT) In charge at ibrox between 2001 and 2006- slammed the suggestion titles should be stripped.
McLeish said “We did nothing wrong”
(even after the HMRC case he can still say this…..god help us).
It would be very disappointing if that was to happen to rangers and i don’t believe it should.
“If a guy turns up at my door looking for the medals back he’ll be getting a right hander”
(and some wonder where some of the fans get it from).
Now Mr McLeish when you sit back and look at the medals do you for one minute look at them after the HMRC verdict,and what the 3 judges said, do you now look at them to be devalued and not the sporting Honour you believed them to hold?
scapaflow 6th November 2015 at 2:34 am #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
===================================================
Scapa…I “feel your pain”…sorry re the apparently patronising cliche (where is the accent for the “c”?)
Perhaps somewhat fortunately for me, I do not pass Haymarket Yards every day…otherwise the internal residents, aka “bar stewards”, would have me “sin died”…and I sincerely hope the same would apply to your wee brother…!
RIP Messrs Corsica and McConville!
Auldheid 6th November 2015 at 7:18 pm
‘…OBB was shorthand for the Offensive Behavior at Football Bill (somebody please look up correct title Im on my second large bacardi) ..’
_____
If youu can focuss clearly, Auldheidd, the fulll ttittle o the Sct is
“Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland ) Act 2012 “
Big Pink 6th November 2015 at 5:05 pm # New Podcast with David Low on the TRFC accounts – and the BTC resulthttp://podcast.sfm.scot/e/roundup-s01e03/
=================================
Being just the 1039th person to listen in.
That must have been hard to step around.
But I’m intrigued as to who the Gers guys who “may” step in but totally turned off by all the known issues may be?
Are they:
Latent Kamikazee pilots.
Unknown ?? Unknowns.
Or is he just being kind? (offering hope where there is none)
broganrogantrevinoandhogan 6th November 2015 at 1:42 pm #Good Afternoon.
What this means is that the accounts of Rangers PLC did not disclose additional liabilities of not only the £49 Million but also the sums that the company had contractually obliged itself to pay by way of the side letters concerned. That sum comes to approximately £45 Million.
This then makes the Rangers accounts, as declared and exhibited, short by some £94 Million over a period of some 10 years or so.
When granting that licence, The SFA MUST have regard to the financial statements put forward by the club and determine if the club meets the SFA’s financial rules and whether the financial information provided allows the SFA to safely reach the conclusion that the club concerned has sufficient finances to fulfil its fixtures.
When it came to making these assessments, the SFA relied and were allowed to rely on completely false financial figures for a decade or more. The figures submitted were deliberately doctored to exclude any sums due under the side letters, and any tax which may have fallen due as a result of those side letters.
=================================================
BRTH…superb stuff!
May I ask, probably a tad naively, if the financial submissions made to Campbell and his cohorts at the SFA over the period in question, in support of the annual licence application, were made based purely on the “financial statements put forward by the club” in the form of a “in house” SFA form, whereby boxes would be “ticked” and/or supported by a copy of the most recent audited accounts?
Just asking…..
I know people pooh pooh it but some folks must listen to SSB and one of tonight’s pundits DJ has column in the ET.
However the whole show is one of the things what’s is wrong with Scottish Football .
While I am not a Celtic man Keevins was the biggest see you next Tuesday with regards to comments on Delia.
The obsession on SSB and the rest of the MSM with what’s goes on with Celtic and Rangers is just unhealthy. Pure and simple.
Keevins was continually asking what was Celtics position in Europe as opposed to asking about the aims of all Scottish clubs.
How can we ever hope to progress if young up coming managers like McNamara get punted for being at the bottom of 12 team league and the head off to places likes York.
Surely we need to be looking at a larger league structure to take the pressure off so that our young players and managers alike are given an environment that allows them to develop, flourish and even experement as opposed to being cautious and unambitious and decried at the first signs of ‘failure’.
Is it any wonder that if someone came looking for Robbie Neilson and others, they would jump at the chance??
Homunculus 6th November 2015 at 3:51 pm #I have been reading a lot of sites where it is being argued that Rangers / MIH took legal advice on the use of EBTs and that since they were told EBTs were legal they decided that there was nothing wrong in using them. As such they could not have been cheating.
I ask the simple question, if Rangers thought that it was OK to use EBTs then why did they fail to reveal the side letters to the SFA, risking being caught, fined heavily and potentially losing trophies they had won, by failing to follow the rules.
I can only come up with one reason. They knew what they were doing was wrong, and if the side letters came to light they would risk losing tens of millions in tax.
Basically they had to lie to the football community so as not to get caught lying to the tax authorities
I believe that is known as “mens rea”. They were cheating and the knew they were doing it.
======================================================
Homunclus…your reasoning reminds me of that wonderful line of Ronnie Barker’s in “Porridge”, when asked…”…what are you in for?”
To which he replied…”…got caught!”
Re many comments on the “expert” tax advice received by Minty and the many may comments on Gers sites that he was “duped” Here are a few pointers from Tax Exempt corner of accounting web website: (and BTW last known reference to Mr PBWs whereabouts)
BW planningCarl Barwick | Mon, 13/07/2015 – 15:25 | PermalinkAs Justin says, it is, indeed, Baxendale Walker planning using what are termed “remuneration trusts”. Paul Baxendale Walker literally wrote the book on them (published by Robert Venables’ publishing company) and you can pick up a copy for 125 quid if you want to know more. At the moment, HMRC don’t appear to quite know how to attack the structure and I am aware of many enquiries which have just been left open for many years.
Here are a few:
Make your mind up if RFC were just waiting to be next:
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2014/1378.html
http://www.jerseylaw.je/judgments/unreportedjudgments/documents/display….
http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/local-news/paul-baxendale-walker-fraud-t…
http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/paul-baxendale-walker-trial-…
http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/TC/2014/TC03549.html
http://www.jerseylaw.je/judgments/unreportedjudgments/documents/display….
http://www.jerseylaw.je/judgments/unreportedjudgments/documents/display….
http://www.solicitorstribunal.org.uk/Content/documents/9124-2004%20-%20B…
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2013/2944.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2451353/Loaded-magazine-owner-Pa
Stevie BC,
edit
The Sports Direct arrangement remains terrible for Rangers and fans should be aware that any official merchandise purchase, from any retail outlet, is simply strengthening the ability of Mike Ashley to hold our club to ransom.“We would urge fans not to buy any official merchandise until there is a comprehensive revision of the existing deal.”======================A few nuggets there to attract a strongly worded letter from Ashley’s legal team
****
Is this the first known case of an alleged extortionist pre- paying his alleged victim?
essexbeancounter 6th November 2015 at 8:43 pm
‘…that wonderful line of Ronnie Barker’s in “Porridge”, when asked…”…what are you in for?”To which he replied…”…got caught!”’
_______
And like that Ronnie, our football authorities have got caught four-square
-in backing a deceitful, tax evading, unsporting tyke like SDM,
-compounding their offence by trying to bully and bludgeon the rest of us into accepting that we ‘need’ to keep his dead team alive ( heard the usual load of crap from Alec Rae and English on Sportsound this evening!),
-and really stepping over any and every line of decency and sound and fair Football administration by even dealing with the CGs of the world, let alone signing secret and shameful dirty deals.
We really must nail these men good and hard.
PS. I got a very nice little reply from UEFA to my query ( whatever else may be wrong at UEFA, they reply to queries, and promptly!)
There were no Scottish participants at the Istanbul-located UEFA Universities Football Law Programme at the end of October.
There was an Irish and an English representation.
Perhaps even the SFA realises that sending someone to help clue them up on the law as it relates to football would be a hypocrisy too far!
John Clark 6th November 2015 at 9:12 pm # essexbeancounter 6th November 2015 at 8:43 pm‘…that wonderful line of Ronnie Barker’s in “Porridge”, when asked…”…what are you in for?”To which he replied…”…got caught!”’_______And like that Ronnie, our football authorities have got caught four-square -in backing a deceitful, tax evading, unsporting tyke like SDM, -compounding their offence by trying to bully and bludgeon the rest of us into accepting that we ‘need’ to keep his dead team alive ( heard the usual load of crap from Alec Rae and English on Sportsound this evening!), -and really stepping over any and every line of decency and sound and fair Football administration by even dealing with the CGs of the world, let alone signing secret and shameful dirty deals. We really must nail these men good and hard. PS. I got a very nice little reply from UEFA to my query ( whatever else may be wrong at UEFA, they reply to queries, and promptly!) There were no Scottish participants at the Istanbul-located UEFA Universities Football Law Programme at the end of October. There was an Irish and an English representation. Perhaps even the SFA realises that sending someone to help clue them up on the law as it relates to football would be a hypocrisy too far!
=======================================74
John/Essex
Genuine thanks for following up on that Law in Football Istanbul conference:
I can imagine one startled trainee from Hampden towers getting a text from the 6th floor.
No I mean don’t go. Call in sick FFS.
The bams are on it.
You wouldn’t learn anything there anyhow.
Its all about being above board. Not our schtick.
Kapish Omerta young one.
Return home say nothing. Learn nothing.
Been back to lurking since attending the Perth gathering. Superb analysis of the EBT ruling on here.
It came to my attention today that the SFA have sought legal advice on the implications of the CoS ruling. I would guess that such advice would be in their hands (sorry inbox) by Monday……interesting to see what announcement follows.
I understand that Mike Ashley has just been appointed to the Board of Rangers Retail Limited, a company where SDI Retail Services Limited and SportsDirect.com Retail Limited together currently have a shareholding of 75%.
He may be unaware that a fellow Director, a Mr Dave King, was in part the subject of RNS Number : 2959E issued by Rangers Int. Football Club PLC to the London Stock Exchange on 6 February 2015 (apparently this RNS is no longer available on the RIFC site).
The RNS stated inter alia :
“In August 2013 David King was convicted on 41 counts of breach of s.75 of the South African Income Tax Act. As part of the plea which led to those convictions he agreed to pay a sum in Rand which equates to approximately £40,000,000 in respect of unpaid tax, and either to pay a fine or accept a prison sentence. The Board understand that Mr King elected to pay the fine.
The link below is to a South African Revenue Service press release which gives details of the convictions:
http://www.sars.gov.za/media/mediareleases/pages/29-august-2013—joint-media-statement-–-settlement-between-the-state-and-mr-dc-king.aspx
In addition the following comments about Mr King were made by a judge in a different South African legal case, to which the link is as follows:
http://www.lexisnexis.co.za/pdf/FPI-2012-Tax-Planning-Jerry-Botha-Case1103820066October2010.pdf
Mr King has subsequently been identified in the media as the person identified as “Mr N” in that case. Those comments include these statements:
“…he deliberately misrepresented the facts of the case…”
“he has no respect for the truth and does not hesitate to lie… if he thinks it will be to his advantage”
“there can be little doubt that on most occasions [he] lied…” “we …are unanimous in finding that he is a mendacious1 witness whose evidence should not be accepted”
“in our assessment he is a gl*b and sh*meless li*r”
1 “given to or characterized by deception or falsehood or divergence from absolute truth” (Definition from http://www.merriam-webster.com)”
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/12241662.html
The Regulatory Notice further noted that “The Directors have also been advised by the Company’s NOMAD that there could be a material adverse impact on the Company’s listing on AIM if David King, one of the proposed directors, is appointed to the Company’s Board.”
Mr King, and Mr Paul Murray, another Rangers Retail Limited Director, both appear to have been Directors of a Scottish Football club, now in liquidation, against which HMRC have recently won a claim for more than £47M resulting from payments made to players of that club.
As The Scotsman wrote on this subject :
“The judges ruled that the “true nature” of the payments to Rangers players were bonuses, which were typically negotiated by their agent and formalised in a “side-letter” separate to their official contract.
Lord Drummond Young added: “It seems to us to be self-evident that the obligations in the side-letter were part of the employee’s employment package, and provided him with additional remuneration. They were negotiated as part of the total employment package.”
http://www.scotsman.com/news/scotland/top-stories/hmrc-win-big-tax-case-against-rangers-1-3937078#axzz3qkS6loTl
Mr Ashley may have legitimate concerns over the possibility of reputational damage to himself, colleagues and shareholders resulting from association with these Directors.
Perhaps someone could advise Mr Ashley on whether Mr King and Mr Paul Murray meet the ‘fit and proper’ criteria that Sports Direct and their subsidiary Rangers Retail Limited have in place for their Directors and Officers.
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
A prefect Tsunami is heading RIFC way due to DCK .
I expect him to walk right into a trap of entirely his own making.
sixlargebeers 6th November 2015 at 9:41 pm # Been back to lurking since attending the Perth gathering. Superb analysis of the EBT ruling on here. It came to my attention today that the SFA have sought legal advice on the implications of the CoS ruling. I would guess that such advice would be in their hands (sorry inbox) by Monday……interesting to see what announcement follows.
—————————————–
Yes all everyone will be twitching to see what “they deign the answer”.
My take would be:
WE tell them the answer as “they” are either conflicted corrupted or more likely useless.
It’s been along time since I’ve been on here, although I follow religiously (sic)….
Congratulations to the big hitters, including those no longer with us, who have kept fighting the good fight…
My point is…
Does a boycott by the The Rangers supporters matter? As far as I understand it…whether merchandise is purchased or not is of no consequence to Big Mike…The Rangers have to buy the unsold goods…am I right?…
Anyway, the news the other day is the best thing I have heard in the last 4 years of this nonsense, now let’s not stop…
The cheating involved, if it were to happen abroad, would have us all puffing our cheeks, exhaling and shaking our heads, so why not in Scotland?
The real fight starts now…
I have never contributed financially to SFM, but I’ll start now…
And so should we all, a few quid a month, the price of a couple of pints?
Let’s get this mess sorted!
sixlargebeers 6th November 2015 at 9:41 pm
‘…It came to my attention today that the SFA have sought legal advice on the implications of the CoS ruling. I would guess that such advice would be in their hands (sorry inbox) by Monday……interesting to see what announcement follows.’
__________
Some at least of the member clubs of the SPFL must now be ready and willing to start asking searching questions of the Boards of both the SPFL and the SFA.
We know that some were very unhappy at all the ‘Armageddon’ nonsense, an unhappiness strong enough to tell those Boards to take a flying duck to themselves when they wished to put the new club into the old SPL.
They, to be fair , would have been inhibited by the constant assertions that Murray’s little dodge was legal. ( They might even have been irritatedly envious of his ‘cleverness’ and wished they had had the nerve to engage the advice of the pornographer struck-off lawyer)
Now, however, that the cleverness has been adjudged to have been in serious breach of taxation law, they can freely and openly say: we have all along been had by that SDM, and severely let down by either the useless or the complicit officers we appointed to keep our Football honest and clean and fair , with Integrity as the keystone.
There may be, and ought to be, an EGM requisitioned, so that the general membership of the SFA can make an attempt to get our game, and their damaged businesses, restored to us , and positively flagged up as a genuinely non-rigged sport.
The members know that their officers put such a spin on things previously that they cannot now be trusted to tell them the truth about what the legal position might be.
I hope that the concrete evidence that cheat Murray was lying to them all ,and giving two fingers to them ,as he cheated them even as he sat pontificating and reveling in the sycophantic grovelling of the SMSM, will be the catalyst for the cleansing: the correction of the sporting records, the insistence of immediate payments that the ‘5-Way agreement ‘ obliges the new club to pay on behalf of the dead club, and the refusal to refer in any official document , to ‘Rangers’ as if TRFC were the dead club.
(The McLeishes of the world may be told they can keep any of the medals they ‘won’ : they will be worth only the price of the base metal of which they are made. Not worth a tuppenny damn as signalling any ‘sporting’ achievement)
ianagain 6th November 2015 at 7:38 pm #
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/an-arranged-marriage-between-rangers.html
If this wee tet a tet by email is true then the baws truly up on the slates and not coming down until answered.
======
This is basically true but the source tried to implicate me on his blog using my actual name and is only using info provided to him in confidence to regain credibility.
All of what he says is driving Res12 and whilst this is fairly accurate it is nevertheless sneaky.
If you want the full narrative in context e mail auldheid046@gmail.com
sixlargebeers 6th November 2015 at 9:41 pm #Been back to lurking since attending the Perth gathering. Superb analysis of the EBT ruling on here. It came to my attention today that the SFA have sought legal advice on the implications of the CoS ruling. I would guess that such advice would be in their hands (sorry inbox) by Monday……interesting to see what announcement follows.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
When a public body issues a press release or leaks information saying they are taking legal advice about some tricky political issue…..its usually because
They are caught between a hard place and a rock
In this case
The hard place( for all) is confronting the Loonies and (for some)letting down the Brethren
The rock is the legal noose the Scottish Court of appeal has tied round the neck of the Law Lords reviewing the EBT case at lower levels
A noose that could lead to public criticism of the SFA if they fail to act properly on the consequences of BDO deciding not to appeal and the ruling becoming fixed in stone
In these circumstances the PR advice is frequently to act quickly while the matter is still seen as a legal issue residing within a fairly limited time window
I suspect the SFA have already taken legal advice and been advised they need to act in some punitive manner towards RFC (2012)
So what they are really doing now is giving themselves a breathing space during which they design the minimum punishment needed to stop the 3 Law Lords from commenting adversely on the SFA response to the EBT decision
and
Ensuring they do nothing they don`t have to do until the Appeal window has closed without an Appeal being made by BDO
So nothing will happen for at least 4weeks
Christmas Eve would be a good time to issue a statement
More so than Hogmany
A Doctor writes:
I have been contacted lately by a number of patients that seem to have been consumed by a condition related to latent and unknown symptoms related to unpaid tax bills.
Insert Here list: (forgot im a doctor patient confidentiality and all)
Symptoms are bizarre ranting in the press and an inordinately unreasoned tourretes type reaction to shout ” we don’t know what its about”
As a seasoned GP ill tell ye PAY UP.
Sorry if that diverged from the English version.
There is a very interesting piece by Lord Carloway about what seems to be fairly major changes in the way our Courts are set up. Apparently, there was a Court Reform (Scotland) Act passed last year, which has only come into effect very, very, recently. As an ordinary citizen who in the ordinary way listens to the news and so on, I had no idea that this was happening.
If you are interested, the link is
http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/Upload/Documents/LJCFacultyofAdvocatesConferenceAimsoftheCivilCourtsReforms18September2015.pdf
If you scroll down you’ll come to the bit about changes in the rules covering Appeals to the Supreme Court. ( It was definitively posted earlier that these appeals have to be made within 28 days, and that time limit is mentioned in Lord Carloway’s paper)
Now, I’m no lawyer of course, but reading what his lordship says, under the new regime, I cannot see that permission to appeal would ever be granted for an appeal against the recent judgement: and the Supreme court would not over-ride that refusal.
Have a read, just for general interest.
BRTH Excellent post at 1.42pm yesterday, sums up everything required to allow everyone to be involved in moving forward
Have a read at this.
http://beta.scotsman.com/sport/football/competitions/premiership/spfl-a-million-miles-away-from-deciding-on-rangers-titles-1-3940297#axzz3qlO5cUQ3
And ask yourself, is it or is it not, the perfect example of either the poor quality of our ‘newspaper’ men/women OR of the determination ALWAYS to act as PR for a rotten SFA/SPFL as long as the handout they are given is favourable to one particular section of their readership?
I will just post this purely for the reason it indemnifies the nonsense Heidi poon went through AND to remind us all of the bright mind of PMc C.
#
← Why It’s Nonsense to Say “Rangers Won the Tax Case So the SPL Should Drop Its “Witch-Hunt”!”How to Appeal From the First Tier Tribunal (Tax) to the Upper Tribunal →November 25, 2012 · 2:00 pm↓ Jump to CommentsMyths of the Rangers FTT Result – An Occasional Series – Part 1 – Dr Poon’s DissentThe Rangers saga will make a number of exceptional case studies, covering numerous areas of law, together with PR, journalism, and even some football!
The comments which have flowed like lava from Krakatoa (which is west of Java, despite the film title) since the declaration of the FTT result are a fine example of the way in which people, on the Internet and in the media, fit the facts into their own narrative, rather than the other way about.
It is a human trait to do so, and I am sure I have been guilty of it myself.
One area of comment I have seen popping up over the last couple of days relates to the dissenting opinion from Dr Heidi Poon, and the status of that opinion.
The narrative which is being pushed and indeed is being believed runs as follows.
The dissenting opinion was only published in an appendix and therefore is not part of the decision.It is therefore of no importance in the case and can be disregarded.The majority opinion ignored what Dr Poon had to say because her decision was in some way nonsensical and not worthy of analysis.Dr Poon is not a lawyer and therefore her opinion can be ignored because the two lawyers on the panel reached a different conclusion.One of the confusing factors about judicial decision-making is that judges can reach the same conclusions but for different reasons, or even follow the same analysis but reach a different conclusion.
It is unusual for there to be a dissenting judgement in the FTT, but it is also unusual to have a case last as long as this one. The vast majority of FTT (Tax) Appeals are dealt with in one day before one or two panel members. It is rare for three such experienced individuals to make up a panel in a case at the FTT.
We need to look at the potential appeal process now. It would run as follows.
From the First Tier Tribunal, with leave, and on a question of law only, the decision can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal.From there an appeal lies on a point of law to the Inner House of the Court of Session.Finally, the decision of the Inner House, on a point of law, can be appealed to the UK Supreme Court.Normally the Upper Tribunal sits with one judge alone. In cases of importance or complexity, the Tribunal can be expanded. Bearing in mind the importance of the issues decided here, if HMRC decides to appeal, it is likely that a three member Upper Tribunal would be convened.
From there, the Inner House would have at least three judges hearing any appeal and finally the UKSC would consist of at least five members.
Therefore, if the case goes through all of its stages, the matter would have been considered by at least fourteen judges.
The question “what is the law” is one which has generated millions of pages of analysis. I do not propose to add much to that, but one simple (hah) analysis is that “the law is what the judges say it is”. That is fine at first hearing, but on the principles in this case, it would be possible for the results to go as follows.
FTT – Rangers/MIH 2 – 1 HMRCUpper Tribunal – Rangers/MIH 3 – 0 HMRCInner House – Rangers/MIH 3 – 0 HMRCSupreme Court – Rangers/MIH 2 – 3 HMRC(I am not predicting the outcome of any of these appeals – this is designed as an illustration.)
If you were using the aggregate principles of football, HMRC would be on the end of a thumping 10 – 4 defeat.
But, in the legal world, and therefore in the real world, HMRC would have won, even if the three judges who found for it in the Supreme Court did so on entirely distinct and indeed inconsistent grounds!
What then would “the law” be on this issue? As for the particular case, it would be the majority verdict. However, if the Upper Tribunal overturns the decision, then the law will be, and will always have been what the Upper Tribunal decides. If the Inner House then overturned the Upper Tribunal, the law would be changed yet again, but equally would have been the same all along, and similarly with the Supreme Court.
As for future cases…it would need either legislation to clarify the issue, or more likely more cases where subsequent judges tried to make sense of the potential fourteen different decisions in this case.
No wonder people say that the law can be confusing.
As this case contained very detailed analysis of the “form over substance” v “substance over form” debate, as per the Ramsay case, it would not be surprising if there was a desire by HMRC for an authoritative ruling.
Imagine that, right now, you were a tax adviser (ignoring for a minute that the tax advantages of EBTs have been ended by primary legislation) how would you advise your client on the use and management of an EBT scheme? Follow the majority opinion and find, if overturned on appeal that you, as the adviser are being sued for giving bad advice, or follow the minority view, only to find that HMRC drops the appeal before a final hearing?
Issue like this show why, despite the attractions of the “legal realist” theory that “the law is what judges say it is”, the issues are never so simple.
Dr Poon’s decision is an integral part of the verdict. To a large degree, it would form the basis of any HMRC appeal, and is clearly on a matter of law, as Dr Poon disagreed with the majority on the interpretation and application of the legal issues in the case.
Judicial decision-making is a collaborative process too. The judges are not locked in sealed rooms, with no contact with each other, until they produce a decision. Instead they meet to discuss the case, and to test each other’s arguments. The aim is to reach a unanimous decision but that is not always possible, as we see here.
Because of the nature of the FTT, the decision is not binding as a precedent on any other FTT. One can well imagine, until there is an authoritative decision on the principles (not the facts) that the majority and minority opinions will be cited in any similar cases, and the judge or judges hearing them are free to follow one or other, or indeed to arrive at a third analysis.
This all leads to the specific narrative – Dr Poon is not a lawyer so no wonder she was “wrong”. Some of the comments I have read make it sound as if she was there on a YTS and somehow infiltrated the hearing room and joined the panel that way!
There was even a comment suggesting that Dr Poon was clearly the source for the alleged leaking of documents to the Rangers Tax Case blog because Dr Poon was the only member of the Tribunal to “agree” with RTC! There is a lot of nonsense spouted on the Internet, but that is up there for “the most ridiculous suggestion of the month award”.
Dr Poon is a distinguished Chartered Accountant with a legal background, including time spent working with one of the country’s leading legal firms. She is an experienced member of the FTT panel. She is a professional Judge.
Does anyone seriously think that, when deciding which three members were to make up the Tribunal, the thought process was as follows – “Well, we have a brilliant tax QC, an eminent tax lawyer, and let’s throw in a numpty to make up the numbers!” I suspect not.
However these “facts” are being repeated every minute on the web, and in the media. And they are not the only ones where what is being said is not “fact” but “fiction”…
Posted by Paul McConville
There is a way forward.
A new rangers logo.
We
An rfc crest
Cheated. (Sorry)
That would circumvent the mash ip issue, reconcile Scottish football.
It’s not the desire to punish former rfc fans (hail fellow John james, well met) that motivates me. There but for the grace of God and all that. No time for the knuckle draggers. But without a blatant nod in the direction of the cheating that was tolerated hitherto, games a bogey for all of us. We are here to compete against ranjurs. On a level playing field. We lose fair and square so be it. But when you tilt the park until you are sure to win, as you did for a decade, be sure to keep your nadgers out of range! We are not kicking you when you are down. We are pulling you by your exposed scrotum back into the real world from a mental illness that had consumed you and hurt us. The appropriate response is gratitude. Hint.
Auldheid 6th November 2015 at 11:50 pm # ianagain 6th November 2015 at 7:38 pm # http://footballisfixed.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/an-arranged-marriage-between-rangers.htmlIf this wee tet a tet by email is true then the baws truly up on the slates and not coming down until answered. ====== This is basically true but the source tried to implicate me on his blog using my actual name and is only using info provided to him in confidence to regain credibility. All of what he says is driving Res12 and whilst this is fairly accurate it is nevertheless sneaky.
If you want the full narrative in context e mail auldheid046@gmail.com
And If actually wishing to comment TSFM folks you should before responding. I did u know it makes sense.
From July 2012:
TWO members of the three-man SFA panel which imposed a 12-month transfer embargo on Rangers will play no further part in the case.
Lord Carloway and Spartans chairman Craig Graham will be replaced if, or when, the SFA’s Appellate Tribunal reconvenes to consider the transfer ban again.
The panel was ruled to have acted outwith its powers by Lord Glennie when Rangers challenged the SFA in the Court of Session.
SportTimes understands Lord Carloway was unhappy that his verdict was contradicted by another judge and wrote to the SFA to inform them he would no longer be available for any future cases. Graham could not consider the case again because of the possibility that suspending or expelling the oldco Rangers’ SFA membership (which the newco club seeks to take over) could create a vacant league place for which his own club, Spartans, could seek to apply.
—————————————
Lord Carloway, Someone to be trusted. DG.
Watching Peter, Paul and Mary and it appears male pattern baldness has been there since somebody noticed it . Am I affected ? Yes . Do I give a monkeys ? There’s nae mirrors in ma hoose .The same might be said about the powers that be, both in football in Scotland and in the Scottish Establishment . What we have here is an inconvenience that will be dealt with to their satisfaction, not ours . Good luck in taking on the vested interests wrt title stripping and reform of the governance of Scottish football . They will circle the wagons and brand you a traitor (or worse) for not being in there with them . Apparently the request to appeal against the CoS decision has to be lodged by Dec 2nd , so that gives a reasonable amount of time to concoct a form of words that basically says “shit happens, let’s move on” We {Thistle) might have won a cup game at Ibrox during that period but for the intervention of the officials , but the talk in the papers was about the money we would make in the replay rather than the injustice . It must have been soul-destroying for professional opponents of RFC to know that, no matter how good you are , the fix is in (unless, maybe they were supporters of the same. I know one such and he doesn’t apologise – just doing what’s expected of him and he did it willingly and without remorse .). It is just the way it is and won’t be changing anytime soon-the establishment will still be there looking after it’s own . Next you’ll be asking, nay demanding ,votes for women and transparency . If it pans out as I expect , I will be doing the “walking away” bit .
I normally use one with sunglasses and am disappointed that it isn’t available and am now officially in a cream puff .
Listening to Bob Dylan now (folk/rock genius for the younger viewer) What Good Am I ? Read it(or listen) and weep, SFA .
Paddy M. Take heart. Society does move on. (Slowly).
When I was growing up it was ok to tell jokes about people with disabilities, gay people, women, The Irish, etc. all the stuff we now consider not PC.
The ‘Establishment’ has been crumbling for years now. The SMSM is about to die in my lifetime. Their hard copy sales, which are the main source of income, are going through the floor. Sites like this, are now keeping people informed.
For instance, if Keith Jackson had a pair he would see the future and immediately resign from the rag he works for. Set up an internet site, apologise for all his past rubbish, tell the truth, without taking into consideration his ‘demographic’.
The Idea of Scotland as a Presbyterian controlled country aided and abated by the masonic lodge is just about gone. People under 40 now have little or no faith. Added to that, you will find few folk who do not have members of family from a different ‘persuasion’.
The bigotry surrounding Scottish Football is the last bastion of our sorry past. But for the reasons I mentioned above, I live in hope. In a generation or two maybe we can all be Jock Thamsons Bairns.
Well lets just call this week.
Bampots a huge.
F ~U to them
Journalism really isn’t all that difficult if you simply state the facts:
http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/article/rangers-lose-tax-case-replay/592377
(via David Low’s Twitter)
Absolutely no need to tie yourself up in verbal contortions. Unfortunately, this seems beyond the capabilities of our national broadcaster.
Further on in the article, there’s some amusing naiveity from Rob Wilson, Sport Finance Expert, Sheffield Hallam University:
Clearly he is unfamiliar with the principles of Brysonology.
Well as Friday’s go in this saga, yesterday was fairly quiet considering the pace that was set earlier in the week but I think next Friday will be a different affair altogether given Charlie and his highly paid teams appearance in court.
Anyway now that the cheatery of Rangers has, as we all know was the case, been confirmed, there’s always a constant nagging in my mind as to when it all really began. Let’s not forget Murray took over at Ibrox in 1986. Did Derek Ferguson not recently mention on radio that Maurice Johnston received a rather sizeable amount paid directly into a Swiss bank account to convince him to sign for the old Rangers in 1989? If there’s any fact in this, I would suggest Murray was more or less at it from the outset. Why did these top English players like Butcher, Woods, Steven and Gascgoine really come north of the border? The golf and fishing? Souness was the manager of course and he got an EBT despite not working at the club when they were in use. You couldn’t make it up!
I also think of the comments of Hugh Adam in 2002. Surely he wasn’t referring only to the contracts of Flo, De Boer and Moore at that stage?
The old Rangers won nine titles in a row from 1989 – 1997. I’d be astonished if all these weren’t tainted too. If what Derek Ferguson said live on the Beeb is factual, there’s two for starters!
rougvielovesthejungle
weren’t the english banned from europe at the time so came up here for an earner and chance to play in euro comps
ianagain 7.11 @ 1.43 am
—————————–
that was random thoughts finest hour in this whole mess…….. if out of this whole saga heidi p gets even a glimmer of hope for substance over form in a countrys tax laws she will be the heroine of all heroines……. if………
suspect bdo dont have a clue
if they need a seat on a barbers chair or a loo
Re Tony at 8.00am
Aye Tony, that was the reason given in the MSM at the time right enough so it must be true
rougvielovesthejungle
when i say earner,we all know what that means by now,and as for smsm they have a 1972 cup winners cup pullout today lol,says it all about them
Two unrelated thoughts:
With regard to any possible appeal, BDO have nothing to gain that I can see, and the costs to lose. Thursday’s decision simply means a much bigger piece of the creditors’ pie for HMRC and much smaller pieces for the other creditors. BDOs duty is to all of the creditors in proportion to the amounts owed. DM might appeal if he believes he has much by way of residual reputation. This has been portrayed as an EBT test case, and the question I have been asking myself is whether another (ie English) football club or company with a lot to lose from Thursday’s ruling might look to fund an appeal. Is that conceivable?
Secondly we are seeing with the old media and the question of any sporting penalty a repeat of their (successful) role in establishing DK’s fit and proper status with the SFA. They are basically trying to manage expectations. Sadly there are people stupid enough to believe Johnstone’s utterly execrable drivel in the Evening Times comic. Meanwhile Spiers is being his usual disingenuous self when he recognises that the question of ‘title stripping’ is valid but then goes on to say that he is personally against this without even attempting to justify his position.
More importantly, assuming of course there is no appeal, if ever there was a moment when SFM should grab the initiative and reach out beyond the blog to others and show them what we are all about, then surely this is it.
This is about governance and fairness in the game we all love. It is about there being a proportionate sporting penalty for deliberate industrial scale cheating over many years that quite clearly resulted in an unfair sporting advantage, although I would argue that the latter is not a requirement for any sporting penalty. The logic is not difficult to follow.
How many of the other 41 clubs have fans that contribute to this forum? We need to ensure that every clubs’ board of directors understands fully the feeling of the fans. We need newspaper adverts and I am willing to make a sizeable financial contribution to achieve this.
We should be using the appeal window (I think closes December 3rd) to plan our next move. This is what we say we are all about, so let’s prove it, because otherwise we know based on events of the last few years that there will just be a stitch up.
Bryce Curdy
Quick infrastructure thought for you and Big Pink.
We need addresses. Real and virtual of all clubs and supporters Associations in one place.
Perhaps someone can gather and present to BP to set up as a separate blog page?
That helps take the kind of action you suggest.
Obviously we see sporting integrity as the raison d’être of the site, but what other non-club specific sites are there we could look to engage with? Scotzine? Can’t be seen to be all about Celtic and title stripping.
Thom the Tim says
****Is this the first known case of an alleged extortionist pre- paying his alleged victim
======
there’s been a few select cases previously thon.
Theyre called mortgages!
Bryce Curdy 7th November 2015 at 9:11 am #Two unrelated thoughts:With regard to any possible appeal, BDO have nothing to gain that I can see, and the costs to lose. Thursday’s decision simply means a much bigger piece of the creditors’ pie for HMRC and much smaller pieces for the other creditors.
———————————————————————————————–
I’m not sure if that will be the case. If HMRC decide to pursue players on an individual basis for their personal liabilities, it may be that it needn’t go into the creditor’s pot, but direct to HMRC.
This in turn would actually decrease HMRC’s claim on the creditor pot, and increase the percentage due to the wee folk. Just a thought.
I’m reposting this from yesterday because I reading arguments that there is no proof the use of ebts gave sporting advantage
The charges were registration ones and if you read the blog I linked to earlier you will see what LNS said about what rules would have been broken were ebts illegal.
“Whilst it is unclear which SPL/SFA rules would have been breached by making irregular payments, it was not the rules the Commission was directed to examine as, according to the Lord Nimmo Smith Decision para 88 “ There may be extreme cases in which there is such a fundamental defect that the registration of a player must be treated as having been invalid from the outset “
This is why the matter of that SFM blog is so important. There was a fundamental defect in the registration so the registration MUST be treated as invalid from the outset.
That was true of the then DOS ebts he was kept in the dark about and is now true of all ebts.
This is a crucial point that is being overlooked by msm trying to defend a revisit.
What should be done now is there in LNS words.
Don’t let anyone deflect from it.
The Commission was a sham but because it got screwed (by Campbell Ogilvie as is being pointed out by John James and who I identified did not correct LNS in his testimony ) those doing the stewing have screwed themselves.
The additional point I’d like to make is that the old prove a negative ploy is simply not a debate to engage in. There may be abstract arguments that can be deployed but at the end of the day there is no concrete evidence that can be produced to prove the case.
It’s how Blair and Bush took their countries to war in Iraq. They demanded of Saddam to prove he didn’t have weapons of mass destruction.
He couldn’t because he could not prove something which did not exist did not exist!
So my advice is to stick to LNS quote and ask if a fundamental defect existed in player registration taking ALL that is known now not just about the operation of those ebts but also the attempts by parties at RFC and most probably the SFA to keep all the facts including deception of HMRC 2005 and SFA/UEFA in 2011 and SPL in 2012 into account.
If there was and there IS actual evidence to show there was then the sporting advantage argument is unecessary. In LNS words the players registration is invalid FROM THE OUTSET.
Puts Bryson back in the box and the consequence of playing ineligible players follows. Dems the rules.
Keep our eye on the ball folks.
A PS to above. This approach will need a truly independent enquiry to establish the truth. That I’m is what the SPL must insist on and let justice be served.
I think David Low’s reflections (on how HMRC may pursue the balance of tax due should the Rangers Oldco funds be insufficient to settle the tax in full) are very interesting.
I don’t think there is any doubt at all that the outcome has caught a lot of people unprepared. Dave King for one has now abandoned all thought of rescuing Oldco, since the pot of gold at the end of that particular rainbow has vanished in a cloud of Hector’s dust.
I am also surprised that we are even having the conversation about voiding championship and cup titles – which confirms the unpreparedness of the MSM for the outcome.
The inevitable extrapolations are now taking place with regard to the NIAR achievement. Right now there is a momentum, which though difficult to maintain, is all bad news for the Rangers fans.
Really though, the tax outcome has provided a very convenient haze in which the various players can get on with their own self-serving purposes.
For all the accusations of anti-Rangersness attributed to anyone who deviates from the Yellow Brick Road narrative of victimhood and samecluberry, I think the main question that needs to be answered is this;
Who was really looking after the Rangers fans throughout the saga?
Was it David Murray?
Craig Whyte?
Charlie Green?
Dave King?
Mike Ashley?
The SFA who passed Whyte, Green and King fit for purpose?
The MSM who have championed the cause of each and every individual to have had a set of keys cut for Ibrox and urged fans to do the same.
Ally McCoist and Walter Smith – both of whom provided Charles Green with their talismanic presence?
.. or could it possibly be the alleged Rangers-haters, fans of all clubs (including Rangers) who have been imploring Rangers fans to heed the warnings – all of which have panned out – that they were being lied to and exploited in such an industrial fashion?
I never discount the possibility that we have got it wrong. But it is easy to demonstrate that, up to now, we haven’t.
BryceCurdy was thinking about the appeal and BRT&H has posted at least twice that the tax legals will be nervous if this isn’t appealed (paraphrasing).
A genuine question then who can appeal? A certain logic suggests that BDO can appeal as they were the only defendants (probably wrong legal terminology) represented at HMRCs appeal to the CoS. However further logic suggests the Administrators of the Murray Empire may also appeal because I’m taking it that even the cases referred back to the FTTT have been overturned. This means all EBTs in the original case are currently taxable and that affects those initiated within the rest of the Murray Group. To some extent that equates to me as rejoining a hand of poker having folded but I suppose you wouldn’t fold with what appered at the time a winning hand.
Shirley those are the only two parties that can appeal? I suppose though that they could appeal if someone/something else funds them. But like the Liquidators and Administrators who would take that risk, especially given the liberal use of terms like “common sense” and “self evident” in the judgement.
We need a template letter and 41 SFM bloggers each willing to contact every supporters group and Internet forums for any one of the clubs. TU if you would consider undertaking this.
If there’s an enough enthusiasm we can set up a database.
Bryce,
That is the question I have been pondering.
Outwith Sevco’s case, there is HMRC’s stated aim to smash the EBT gravy train.
This would reach beyond football clubs and into the upper levels of the business world; where the power and influence really resides.
I suspect if it is possible for other than MIH or BDO to mount an appeal, then it will happen. Failing that, BDO could receive ” encouragement” from vested interests from the world of Tax Consultants.
The CoS decision is being attacked on two fronts – the aforementioned broad canvas of Tax liability and the MSM’s crusade to Save Our Titles, the narrow, partisan line.
Auldheid 7th November 2015 at 10:01 am #Bryce Curdy
Quick infrastructure thought for you and Big Pink.
We need addresses. Real and virtual of all clubs and supporters Associations in one place.
Perhaps someone can gather and present to BP to set up as a separate blog page?
That helps take the kind of action you suggest.
—————————————————————————————–
I said as much the other day, but limited my suggestion to Scottish clubs. However having given it more thought, I’m sure there are many European clubs who may like to be made aware they were cheated.
It may be that a few boardrooms want to keep their heads down and bury it, to avoid scrutiny of their own remuneration “habits”, but a tsunami could easily be created on fan forums throughout Europe.
This could become an intolerable pressure not only for the SFA, but UEFA. Lets not get lost and diminished in the international campaign to clean up fitba’, but be a part of it.
It may prove to be a great leveller for Scottish clubs in Europe, and help to eradicate “super leagues” which are basically a training ground for the elite players.
SFM should be composing a round robin letter to circulate through-out Europe for both clubs and forums alike. Something basic but attention grabbing, with an intriguing edge of more information to follow. A teaser to spur curiosity.
Anti-PR if you will.
Smugas 7th November 2015 at 10:17 am #Thom the Tim says****Is this the first known case of an alleged extortionist pre- paying his alleged victim
======
there’s been a few select cases previously thon.
Theyre called mortgages!
3 1 Rate ThisView Comment
*****
Of course, but at least mortgage holders accept their commitment and, in most cases, honour it!
Would the Administrators of the Murray Empire not be risking drilling down into a bigger can of worms if they appeal,people in glass houses and all that.
tony 7th November 2015 at 8:00 am #rougvielovesthejungle weren’t the english banned from europe at the time so came up here for an earner and chance to play in euro comps
======================================================
Yes, that was the case. I had the ‘pleasure’ of sitting at a table at a function some years ago with a later EBT-enjoying Scottish manager and his friend, a retired ex-England captain.
Having engaged in conversation with the latter, I posed the question as to whether he would have joined the exodus from England had he still been playing. His response was vehemently in the negative and continued that those who had made the journey had only done so for financial reasons.
We now know how those rewards were conjured up – subsidised by UK taxpayers.
Scottish Football needs a Public Inquiry into how the governing bodies have failed to properly regulate the sport and as a consequence both cost the taxpayer huge sums of money and debased the sporting integrity of league and cup competitions going back decades.
The judgement of the Inner House was not only correct, in my view, but less of a surprise to me than it was to many on here. The judges in the Inner House are some of the sharpest minds in the country, and professional pride (as well as duty) dictates that any judgement susceptible to an appeal to the Supreme Court would be well thought out and carefully considered, and correct in law in the opinion of the judges. (I’m not sure why the words “the owner of” in paragraph 6 line 4 of the judgement were necessary, but that’s just my opinion.)
As to what should be done now, it’s been said a million times on here, but it’s up to the supporters of other clubs e masse, not the brave stalwarts of SFM, to force their clubs and the authorities to take action. In my view, a powerful message would be sent to clubs and authorities (and possibly even the media) if supporters of all other clubs immediately cease to engage with the Ibrox club, by not attending any games involving them at home, away, or at so called “neutral” venues such as Hampden Park. Anyone attending a game versus the Ibrox club can shout abuse at their supporters until they are hoarse, but they are simply endorsing the status quo by doing so. They are wasting their breath, their money, and no doubt raising their blood pressure in the process. If supporters attend games versus the Ibrox club, they can hardly then moan about the game being rigged, in my view.
If anyone wishes to write to their own club, The Clumpany’s letter to Celtic FC is a very useful template.
A SFM summary of the judgement of the Inner House and its implications needs to be widely available in print form so the idea of paying for it to be published in newspapers is a good one. Another way would be to produce flyers and give them to supporters groups around the country to hand out before games. It needs to be made crystal clear that SFM is a body of supporters from a number of clubs including Hearts, Hibs, Aberdeen, ICT, Celtic, Ross County…and not forgetting Arbroath.
SFM can do their bit by trying to make the facts widely available, but it’s then up to the supporters.
Thanks to all on here and Phil Mac, the Clumpany, and James Forrest. For the record I am a Hearts supporter. I say that to try to get it into the skulls of anyone in the football authorities and Scottish media who reads this that the people who frequent this blog and the ones above are motivated by a desire for truth and fair play, and not because they are a Celtic supporting bunch of “Rangers haters”…
How do you think the smsm would report this level of cheating if the club was say Aberdeen, Hearts, Hibs, Dundee, Dundee Utd, Ross County, Inverness, Motherwell, St Johnstone, Partick Thistle, Kilmarnock, Hamilton and all other Scottish Clubs??
I left out Celtic as I know exactly how they would report it (sad to say).
yourhavingalaugh 7th November 2015 at 11:18 am
===================================
As I understand it the appeal to the Court of Session only related to the Rangers EBTs, so I would imagine any appeal to the Supreme Court could only relate to the Rangers EBTs.
valentinesclown 7th November 2015 at 11:59 am
“I left out Celtic as I know exactly how they would report it (sad to say).”
——————————————————————————————–
I agree VC, but it is an inexcusable fact, that Celtic, if they had adopted an illegal payment regime for players, might still have Forster,VVD, Wanyama, Hooper, et al, (All lost to higher wage paying clubs), and be riding a wave of Euro glory and finances over a considerable amount of years.
I would consider it cheating, and am sure the SMSM would too.
Eventually Chesterton is quoted, in response to the question (and the name of one of his books) “What’s wrong with the world?”, he wrote a letter to the Times saying “I am’. loads of the chanceratti involved with the current situations could answer the same to many similar problems. (I claim that neologism and all royalties from it)
I normally agree with a lot of what Stuart Cosgrove says on BBC Shortbread and think when it comes to Scottish Football that he is one of the good guys.
Today on “Off the Ball”, he said he was against stripping of titles because “some of the players in the Rangers teams were not EBT recipients and it would be unfair to them”.
Or words like that but you get the gist.
I think his logic is wrong and that cheating is cheating and should be dealt with fairly for all.
And I say that Stuart because now I know I was paying good money for me and my boys to watch a league corrupted by Murray’s tax shenanigans and these wins won by the blue club with the help of illegal and undisclosed but over-generous payments to his band of football mercenaries should be acknowledged by our administrators and asterisked at the very least.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-34750400
Owner receives “loan”
Players wages being paid this week for Northampton, here is some meat to the bone of the story
Auldheid – a complete aside if I may.
“It’s how Blair and Bush took their countries to war in Iraq. They demanded of Saddam to prove he didn’t have weapons of mass destruction.
He couldn’t because he could not prove something which did not exist did not exist!”
As a matter of fact (and it is) Blair and Bush knew there were WMD’s (they were actually binary artillery shells – two inert pieces when brought together were lethal and capable of reaching Cyprus and Israel) because the ‘West’ had supplied him with them.
Similar, is the fact that it was a German company who had supplied the chemicals which he used to gas the kurdish civilians in Halabja.
A British company supplied him with the ‘pipework’ which enabled him to construct a huge canon capable of launching massive shells into Israel.
They are still there…………somewhere
Keep up the great work, the dam WILL crack.
On radio Scotland yesterday morning there was a tax lawyer from England who reckoned the CoS decision on EBTs was wrong and well worth an appeal. Can’t see any discussion of this here so far, surprisingly.
He is now writing a blog in three parts explaining his point of view. Part 1 up now, part 2 tomorrow apparently.
Can’t say he’s off to the most promising start with a weird comparison with his granny giving him her savings.
Here’s the link:
http://waitingfortax.com/
His Twitter handle is @jolyonmaugham and he’s getting quite an appreciative response from the followers of the Ibrox club so far.
I’m sure he’d appreciate some erudite and knowledgeable comment from other perspectives.
Night Terror
I wonder how many tax lawyers from England BBC Scotland approached for their opinion? However many it was, it can only be assumed that they were all in agreement on this as no opposing view was given airtime or, indeed, even mentioned.
Jolyon Maugham, thought I recognised the name
http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/05/dont-labour-tax-advisers-pop-up-in-the-strangest-of-places/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/11522525/Labours-non-dom-adviser-represented-celebrity-tax-dodge-film-schemes.html
Although Big Pink has previously asked for fanzines supporters blogs etc I haven’t seen any on forum input I’ve made a start today on the SPFL clubs.
Attached is a list of 41 SPFL clubs website addresses. Where easily found I have included contact details (email/phone/fax) where the former two have been indicated as for general enquiries or indicate reception or switchboard. In a column marked SLO (initiallily intended for Supporter Liaison Officer) I have indicated where other contact details are available. I was a little surprised that only Celtic and Killie advertise on their sites the existence of SLO and in the latter case he is only contactable via a form.
Most of the websites that don’t have email addresses do have forms for comments and indeed on the case of some email addresses provided I have looked into the HTML of the page to extract the address.
I haven’t included social media contacts although most have one/more/all of
For Albion Rovers and East Stirlingshire I could find no contact details on their websites however in common with all SPFL clubs they do have their own SPFL webpages which do include contact details
http://spfl.co.uk/clubs/albion-rovers/
http://spfl.co.uk/clubs/east-stirlingshire/
Finloch 7th November 2015 at 1:18 pm #I normally agree with a lot of what Stuart Cosgrove says on BBC Shortbread and think when it comes to Scottish Football that he is one of the good guys.Today on “Off the Ball”, he said he was against stripping of titles because “some of the players in the Rangers teams were not EBT recipients and it would be unfair to them”.Or words like that but you get the gist.
=============================
It is my understanding that the Rangers team who took the title in 2005 all had an EBT. I wonder who Stuart believes it would be unfair to if the title was removed.
In general though I am hacked off at the damage limitation many in the media are indulging in. If they genuinely want to move on then everything has to be faced up to and properly addressed.
tykebhoy 7th November 2015 at 2:35 pm #Attachment SPFL-Club-Contact-details.xlsx
Attached is a list of 41 SPFL clubs website addresses. Where easily found I have included contact details (email/phone/fax) where the former two have been indicated as for general enquiries or indicate reception or switchboard. In a column marked SLO (initiallily intended for Supporter Liaison Officer) I have indicated where other contact details are available. I was a little surprised that only Celtic and Killie advertise on their sites the existence of SLO and in the latter case he is only contactable via a form.
==========================
I have had reason to deal with the Celtic SLO in the past. He is a sound, helpful guy to deal with.