jambovambo Posted May 30, 2016 Share Posted May 30, 2016 CQN, I know, I know ... : http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/the-resolution-12-newspaper-statement-the-herald-group/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
...a bit disco Posted May 30, 2016 Share Posted May 30, 2016 CQN, I know, I know ... : http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/the-resolution-12-newspaper-statement-the-herald-group/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter 404 Page Not Found!We're sorry, but we can't find the page you were looking for. It's probably some thing we've done wrong but now we know about it and we'll try to fix it. In the meantime, try one of these options: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mysterion Posted May 30, 2016 Share Posted May 30, 2016 Think it was to do with their Resolution 12 stuff. They tried to get an advert in the paper about it and it was turned down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Think it was to do with their Resolution 12 stuff. They tried to get an advert in the paper about it and it was turned down. More exactly, they were approached by the Herald to see if they wanted to put in another page on their latest stuff. So they submitted it. Then were told it wouldn't be taken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 (edited) More exactly, they were approached by the Herald to see if they wanted to put in another page on their latest stuff. So they submitted it. Then were told it wouldn't be taken. I don't think that they even got as far as submitting the text of the article, before the Herald bosses decided they didn't want it. Edit: managed to get hold of a copy PUBLISHERS of THE HERALD, SUNDAY HERALD and EVENING TIMES have informed Celtic Quick News that these Glasgow based newspapers will NOT carry the ?Resolution 12? Newspaper Statement. Earlier this month CQN crowd funded an initiative designed to achieve a wider awareness for the concerns of a group of Celtic shareholders who have questioned the decision to allow Rangers FC to play in European Competitions in 2011 despite having overdue social taxes. Rangers went into administration in February 2012 and were subsequently placed into liquidation in June of the same year after failing to reach an agreement (CVA) with their creditors. Supporters of other clubs across Scotland, including Hearts, Dundee United and Aberdeen contributed to this crowd funding initiative to raise the funds necessary to ?shine a light on issues of football governance in Scotland.? On 25 January 2015 CQN placed an advertisement in the Sunday Herald newspaper in which the facts regarding the status of the current Ibrox club were laid bare. Lawyers in Glasgow and London poured over the text before approving for print. Despite this the Advertising Standards Authority has to dismiss numerous complaints from those who objected to the current Ibrox club being called a ?new entity.? The Sunday Herald had one of its best ever days with the paper selling out across Scotland and being the focus of worldwide media attention. For them it was good business. Since that time the Herald Group have regularly canvassed CQN to take more advertising space. Indeed before the second meeting between Celtic and the new club in this season?s Scottish Cup semi-final, they were very enthusiast about CQN repeating the ?New Club? statement. Their offer was of no interest to CQN. When the ?Resolution 12? newspaper Initiative was announced, two newspapers were mentioned ? one in Switzerland and the other based in England. The intention was clear ? to spread the message across Great Britain and also in Switzerland, where UEFA is based. Research was carried out into which newspapers the Investigation Officers at UEFA are likely to read and the results duly noted. So the Herald, Sunday Herald or indeed the Evening Times (!) were far from being appropriate media choices for this Newspaper Statement. For the organisers, another factor would be cost. The ?New Club? Statement in the Sunday Herald was considerably cheaper than buying space in the much bigger Swiss and English based newspapers. However such was the strength of feeling among supporters at Celtic, Hearts, Aberdeen, Dundee United and other clubs in Scotland that the sums required were raised and with some to spare. So when The Herald?s Senior Media Accounts Manager contacted CQN on 19 May, his interest was noted and was at least worthy of some consideration. Here is what the Herald?s man said: 19 May ? ?I appreciate you guys are running some advertising in The Guardian to raise the Resolution 12 matter & with this in mind I wondered if there was opportunity to take advantage of our portfolio of media brands can help to drive awareness. We have a successful track record of commercial success stories & over 4 million adults engage with our brands via print, digital or social media each month and on a daily basis we connect with over 400,000.? Later in the same day he asked about copy for the Statement. Both CQN and the Herald Group worked in a professional manner to get the ?New Club? statement signed off legally. There would be no reason to doubt that a similar process could not be undertaken again. All attacks on the first ?New Club? Statement had one thing in common ? they never addressed or argued with the substance of the text. They couldn?t. Again here is what the Herald man said: 19 May ? ?Would you be using the content from the Guardian advert? If so can you forward me this & I will check with editor & legal team etc? He was told that at that stage CQN was waiting for the Statement from the Res 12 guys and also that the initiative had been postponed for one week at the request of the Res 12 bhoys. This information was also provided to readers of Celtic Quick News. At this stage no space had been booked into any of the Herald Group?s newspapers, although they had been advised that a booking into the Sunday Herald may be available to them. A few days later The Herald?s Senior Media Accounts Manager was back in touch with CQN with his news. He said: 23 May ? ?Just had feedback from the powers that be & we are unable to run your proposed advert. Good luck with the coverage in the Guardian.? So the newspaper group that carried the ?New Club? Statement, that had actively canvassed for more advertising booking on this subject around the Scottish Cup Semi Final and had approached CQN specifically about running the ?Resolution 12? Statement had, without ever seeing the text for the Resolution 12 Statement, now decided that they did not want to carry this Statement on the issues surrounding Resolution 12! You must wonder why? This week three important UEFA officials go back to work after enjoying their trip to Milan where they witnessed European Football?s ?Most Successful Club? winning yet another European Cup. Having watched Real Madrid, recognised as the FIFA Club of the 20th Century on 23 December 2000, and named Best European Club of the 20th Century by the IFFHS on 11 May 2010, the three UEFA officials will no doubt grab a coffee, have a look at their morning newspaper of choice, then turn their attention to the large brown parcels that have arrived and are sitting on their desks. What they will read has the potential to be a worldwide football story. Just don?t expect to read about it in The Herald, Sunday Herald or The Evening Times. Edited May 31, 2016 by Footballfirst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mysterion Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 I don't think that they even got as far as submitting the text of the article, before the Herald bosses decided they didn't want it. Edit: managed to get hold of a copy Thanks for the info. It's interesting that the bosses at Herald/ET decided to pull this. From a business perspective the commercial dept have pursued it but from a PR perspective the Chiefs declined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Seems there is an ad in a Swiss newspaper today : https://twitter.com/Tim_Poster/status/737927260309716992 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Here's the page http://www.pressreader.com/bookmark/iyvSwDexbSAvgr4HpwnFvynRRJDGTwFN_sWA83H6wBI1/PageView Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Here's the page http://www.pressreader.com/bookmark/iyvSwDexbSAvgr4HpwnFvynRRJDGTwFN_sWA83H6wBI1/PageView Well that won't go down well with Rangers, or their fans, but I'm not sure it'll achieve much more than just pissing them off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Well that won't go down well with Rangers, or their fans, but I'm not sure it'll achieve much more than just pissing them off. Some sevco fan on Twitter thinks it's a major own goal, not going to the trouble of having it translated for publication in the Swiss paper. "@M700KLY Did none of the "brains" behind the #Res12 article seriously consider having it translated to fit in with the paper? All kinds of stooped." That's somewhat missing the point, and forgetting that most Swiss and / or UEFA officials speak and read English better than he probably does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Z Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Some sevco fan on Twitter thinks it's a major own goal, not going to the trouble of having it translated for publication in the Swiss paper. "@M700KLY Did none of the "brains" behind the #Res12 article seriously consider having it translated to fit in with the paper? All kinds of stooped." That's somewhat missing the point, and forgetting that most Swiss and / or UEFA officials speak and read English better than he probably does. Bwahaha, how true. He might even think Swiss is the official language of Switzerland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 (edited) http://stv.tv/sport/football/1356053-sfa-answered-resolution-12-query-on-rangers-euro-licence-says-regan/ Regan interviewed by STV. Still in deflect mode by saying that the "requisitioners" accepted that the licence was correctly awarded after the 31 March 2011 cut-off, but the SFA less forthcoming about the information supplied by Rangers at the end of June 2011, saying it is now a matter for UEFA. Edited June 1, 2016 by Footballfirst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
269miles Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 http://stv.tv/sport/football/1356053-sfa-answered-resolution-12-query-on-rangers-euro-licence-says-regan/ Regan interviewed by STV. Still in deflect mode by saying that the "requisitioners" accepted that the licence was correctly awarded after the 31 March 2011 cut-off, but the SFA less forthcoming about the information supplied by Rangers at the end of June 2011, saying it is now a matter for UEFA. FF A couple of questions - what is the context of this interview - seems very unlike the SFA/Regan to speak about this issue. do we know why it was called /who called it.just curious. As for Regan's statement - am I right in saying that at no point does Regan say unequivocally that Rangers had no social taxes outstanding in contravention of the licencing regulations ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 (edited) FF A couple of questions - what is the context of this interview - seems very unlike the SFA/Regan to speak about this issue. do we know why it was called /who called it.just curious. As for Regan's statement - am I right in saying that at no point does Regan say unequivocally that Rangers had no social taxes outstanding in contravention of the licencing regulations ? It appears that the Resolution 12 "requisitioners" from the Celtic AGM in 2013 have finally seen some progress after three years of being fobbed off by the SFA and their lawyers. The advert in today's papers is the latest stage in that campaign, but follows on from the criticism levied at the SFA in the recent Offshore Game report. Grant Russell at STV has obviously been following it up and managed to get at least some sort of response today. You are right in your assertion. He confirmed that the requisitioners accepted the licence position at 31 March 2011 (they always have done so, although the Offshore Game don't). He failed to make clear what Rangers told the SFA at the end of June 2011 and what the SFA did with that information, or knew about the true tax position at that date. The current position of the requisitioners and the Offshore Game was that Rangers misrepresented the true position at the June declaration, leading both the SFA and UFEA not to follow up with further checks. If the requisitioners are successful in getting UEFA to re-open the case and they establish that Rangers did provide incorrect information, then there could be serious consequences, e.g. a UEFA competition ban for a couple of years. Whether or not that would affect the current embodiment of Rangers, might be down to the SFA or Rangers confirming whether or not it is the same club. Edited June 1, 2016 by Footballfirst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 It appears that the Resolution 12 "requisitioners" from the Celtic AGM in 2013 have finally seen some progress after three years of being fobbed off by the SFA and their lawyers. The advert in today's papers is the latest stage in that campaign, but follows on from the criticism levied at the SFA in the recent Offshore Game report. Grant Russell at STV has obviously been following it up and managed to get at least some sort of response today. You are right in your assertion. He confirmed that the requisitioners accepted the licence position at 31 March 2011 (they always have done so, although the Offshore Game don't). He failed to make clear what Rangers told the SFA at the end of June 2011 and what the SFA did with that information, or knew about the true tax position at that date. The current position of the requisitioners and the Offshore Game was that Rangers misrepresented the true position at the June declaration, leading both the SFA and UFEA not to follow up with further checks. If the requisitioners are successful in getting UEFA to re-open the case and they establish that Rangers did provide incorrect information, then there could be serious consequences, e.g. a UEFA competition ban for a couple of years. Whether or not that would affect the current embodiment of Rangers, might be down to the SFA or Rangers confirming whether or not it is the same club. Mmmm Lovely, lovely biscuits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Mmmm Lovely, lovely biscuits. Careful you don't wake Bryce up!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Careful you don't wake Bryce up!! (damn) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 The Offshore Game ?@theoffshoregame 46m46 minutes ago Translation: @ScottishFA won't provide transparency unless Uefa demand it. #GoodGovernance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 The Offshore Game ?@theoffshoregame 46m46 minutes ago Translation: @ScottishFA won't provide transparency unless Uefa demand it. #GoodGovernance The SFA are trying desperately to stay pals with both opposing sides, while working really hard at doing nothing - Regan must be in agony sitting for so long on that fence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diadora Van Basten Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 The SFA are trying desperately to stay pals with both opposing sides, while working really hard at doing nothing - Regan must be in agony sitting for so long on that fence.Be in no doubt Regan is an old firm apologist who believes that Rangers and Celtic are Scottish Football. He is paid to pay lip service to the other clubs but when push comes to shove he will do whatever the old firm ask him to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mysterion Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 (edited) It would be good if UEFA got involved. It will take a significant campaign though but I suspect there are not enough people to push it through. Edited June 1, 2016 by Mysterion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Another document re the WTC correspondence bewteen HMRC and Rangers has surfaced. It looks to be an important one in the timeline re the 2011 Licence and the requisitioners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 It would be good if UEFA got involved. It will take a significant campaign though but I suspect there are not enough people to push it through. Whilst I live in the microcosm of JKB there is a lot of social media interest and conversations on going. Whether or not those that matter are aware or care time will tell. The Media avoid discussing it with a passion. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Another document re the WTC correspondence bewteen HMRC and Rangers has surfaced. It looks to be an important one in the timeline re the 2011 Licence and the requisitioners. Do you think this is genuine? When the writer talks about the time that's past for instance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Do you think this is genuine? When the writer talks about the time that's past for instance. I've just checked back on the "annexes" provided with the Offshore Game report and that letter is included, so both TOG and the Resolution 12 requisitioners will be aware of its existence. But yes, it will be genuine. Note that the date of the letter is the day before Murray sold the club for ?1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 I've just checked back on the "annexes" provided with the Offshore Game report and that letter is included, so both TOG and the Resolution 12 requisitioners will be aware of its existence. But yes, it will be genuine. Note that the date of the letter is the day before Murray sold the club for ?1. Thanks. Interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Discount offer!!!? Oh how the ordinary PAYE could benefit from that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 I asked Stewart Regan/SFA today about the Tax Justice Network?s claims. Got off-the-record response, SFA unimpressed. @theoffshoregame (@GrahamSpiers) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lost in leith Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Another document re the WTC correspondence bewteen HMRC and Rangers has surfaced. It looks to be an important one in the timeline re the 2011 Licence and the requisitioners. Typically poor drafting from HMRC. The letter suggests that the tax debt is due by 'the club'. This debt formed part of the liquidation....but the club still exists. but as a different legal entity.....or not depending on the context....my head hurts, I'm sure Bryce will be along in a mo to explain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glamorgan Jambo Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Another document re the WTC correspondence bewteen HMRC and Rangers has surfaced. It looks to be an important one in the timeline re the 2011 Licence and the requisitioners. Being a little bit picky this doesn't prove that the debt is actually 'due' at that date. It's an offer that needs to be accepted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 @STVGrant getting grief on Twitter : @GersnetOnline My apologies for taking up query on a possibly suspicious action by Craig Whyte's administration. How could I be so foolish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 (edited) Being a little bit picky this doesn't prove that the debt is actually 'due' at that date. It's an offer that needs to be accepted. My understanding is that HMRC did not get the acceptance they were looking for by 16 May 2011, so they issued Regulation 80 determinations (PAYE) and Section 8 Decisions (NIC) on 20 May 2011. The issuance of these meant that HMRC had exhausted their negotiating options and basically sent Rangers a bill on which they could take enforcement actions after 30 days, as well as charging interest and adding penalties. Edited June 1, 2016 by Footballfirst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllyjamboDerbyshire Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Being a little bit picky this doesn't prove that the debt is actually 'due' at that date. It's an offer that needs to be accepted. From the letter we can see that the maximum length of time Rangers had to pay the ?2.8m was 30 days from 16 May 2011, and then, only if they'd returned the completed agreement by that date. Rangers had already, by 1 April, agreed that the money was due and would be making no further appeal. The letter was, itself, nothing more than a formality prior to sending in the Sherriff's Officers. As we know, they appeared at the door of Ibrox in the following August to collect payment. The debt was 'due' long before the date of this letter, there was no dispute. This letter was no more than the formal process that HMRC have to go through, but it makes it clear, for the UEFA license purposes, that it formed an overdue payable at 30 June 2011, and unless RFC declared it as such with no false claims of 'in negotiation' then they cheated to obtain the license. All that would then remain to be ascertained is; did the SFA actively collude in this cheating? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tweegy Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Can someone clarify the whole res 12 succinctly please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tweegy Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Can someone clarify the whole res 12 succinctly please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/14530533.Stewart_Regan__SFA_were_right_to_award_Rangers_a_license_to_play_in_Champions_League/ Stewart Regan: SFA were right to award Rangers a license to play in Champions League Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/14530533.Stewart_Regan__SFA_were_right_to_award_Rangers_a_license_to_play_in_Champions_League/ Stewart Regan: SFA were right to award Rangers a license to play in Champions League And that's their typo of "licence" not mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August Landmesser Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 Careful you don't wake Bryce up!! Or re-animate him... Like some form of a zombie, or something... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughesie27 Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 Anybody fancy posting a quick summary of this resolution 12 business and the newspaper adverts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-blogger-offshore-game-resolution-8099922#lUS5fbyg4fpLqj7c.97 - ah ha ha ha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 Anybody fancy posting a quick summary of this resolution 12 business and the newspaper adverts? http://www.celticnewsnow.com/res12/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malinga the Swinga Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 There is n o doubt that legally speaking, the SFA were wrong to issue a EUFA license to Sevco as they had an outstanding tax bill at the time. The only dispute is whether Sevco lied and did not admit this, or did they admit it and the SFA were part of the cover up. Whilst the former cannot be ruled out, the behaviour of Regan and the SFA lends itself to believe that it was very much the later that took place and they hoped by allowing Sevco their license, that enough money would be earned from Champions League to enable all bills to. Be settled. This disasterous decision backfired when they were horses and didn't get the CL money. Regan and SFA are now trying to sweep this under the ever expanding carpet that hides things like side contracts, EBT's and 5 way agreements. Whether you agree with the resolution 12 boys or not, there can be no argument that a Euro ban on Rangers, as they are now, would seriously impact on their coffers which would b a good thing for us. The usual suspects will disagree and want to draw a lin under these things that happened a few years ago, but if that is allowed, they will benefit now, and that hurts us. For purely Hearts reasons, I hope the resolution 12 boys pursue and win their case, driving a nail into the Ibrox coffin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
niblick1874 Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-blogger-offshore-game-resolution-8099922#lUS5fbyg4fpLqj7c.97 - ah ha ha ha You're all a bunch of tinfoil hat wearing, lizard fearing, hollow flat earth believing space balls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drewboy Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 There is n o doubt that legally speaking, the SFA were wrong to issue a EUFA license to Sevco as they had an outstanding tax bill at the time. The only dispute is whether Sevco lied and did not admit this, or did they admit it and the SFA were part of the cover up. Whilst the former cannot be ruled out, the behaviour of Regan and the SFA lends itself to believe that it was very much the later that took place and they hoped by allowing Sevco their license, that enough money would be earned from Champions League to enable all bills to. Be settled. This disasterous decision backfired when they were horses and didn't get the CL money. Regan and SFA are now trying to sweep this under the ever expanding carpet that hides things like side contracts, EBT's and 5 way agreements. Whether you agree with the resolution 12 boys or not, there can be no argument that a Euro ban on Rangers, as they are now, would seriously impact on their coffers which would b a good thing for us. The usual suspects will disagree and want to draw a lin under these things that happened a few years ago, but if that is allowed, they will benefit now, and that hurts us. For purely Hearts reasons, I hope the resolution 12 boys pursue and win their case, driving a nail into the Ibrox coffin. Or the new Rangers have to admit that they are a new entity! I prefer the euro ban but this would be pleasing outcome too! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sidsnot Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/14530533.Stewart_Regan__SFA_were_right_to_award_Rangers_a_license_to_play_in_Champions_League/ Stewart Regan: SFA were right to award Rangers a license to play in Champions League Oh really. !!! https://johnjamessite.com/2016/06/02/the-potential-the-postponed/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf's Mate Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 Oh really. !!! https://johnjamessite.com/2016/06/02/the-potential-the-postponed/ If that's correct, in any other business sector Regan would be out on his arse by tomorrow morning. As this is the SFA, they'll continue to peddle the 'we did nothing wrong'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sidsnot Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 If that's correct, in any other business sector Regan would be out on his arse by tomorrow morning. As this is the SFA, they'll continue to peddle the 'we did nothing wrong'.True but if UEFA come knocking on the door then there really will be the proverbial shit hitting the fan.This may mean not only trouble for the usual suspects but also for every club in Scotland because UEFA may just read the riot act whereas they will ask why haven't other clubs got involved in doing something,thing is though,they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 True but if UEFA come knocking on the door then there really will be the proverbial shit hitting the fan. This may mean not only trouble for the usual suspects but also for every club in Scotland because UEFA may just read the riot act whereas they will ask why haven't other clubs got involved in doing something,thing is though,they did. While I don't think it will come to this, indeed anything to come of it, I wouldn't be surprised that every club in Scotland hasn't been made aware of what went in either via the Res 12 guys themselves or fans of each club. We are all complicit in this shambles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chefjambo Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 Don't know if this has been covered or asked before but if sevco had won the cup what name would have been engraved on the trophy. Glasgow Rangers same team anything else new team . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted June 2, 2016 Share Posted June 2, 2016 (edited) Don't know if this has been covered or asked before but if sevco had won the cup what name would have been engraved on the trophy. Glasgow Rangers same team anything else new team . Their name isn't on the cup, nor will it ever be, as they had run out of space before the oldco won it for the first time. Names are now added to plaques on the plinth. Queen's Park, Vale of Leven, Dumbarton, Renton, Hibernian, Third Lanark, Heart of Midlothian, Celtic and that's it. Edited June 2, 2016 by Footballfirst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts