Jump to content

The Rangers soap opera goes on and on.


Sergio Garcia

Recommended Posts

Diadora Van Basten

Yet they could convene a kangaroo court at a days notice to drag Hearts over the coals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rick Grimes

Basically saying their rule book is so shit that a half decent lawyer could drive a truck through it, so its not worth bothering.  What they're failing to acknowledge is there has been a clear breach of the spirit of the rules, even if its probable that they'd lose a legal challenge if it was appealed by Rangers. 

 

What they should be doing is bringing those charges and applying those sanctions anyway - I doubt Rangers have the finances right now to take it to court and even if they did and won surely the governing body needs to be seen to at least try to make the correct action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

alwaysthereinspirit

Unbelievable that the SFA can use so many weasel words to say "We have shat the bed and are curling up in a foetal position until it all goes away"

Blah blah blah Senior councel. Blah blah Senior Councel. Blah Senior Councel.

Unbelievable cowards. Every other club fan in Scotland $#!t on again by a third rate association.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hackney Hearts

They've used the term Senior Counsel five times there - who was this? A Rangers fan by any chance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SFA statement - They are doing SFA

 

Scottish FA statement on Supreme Court ruling

Wednesday, 05 July 2017

 

 

The Board of the Scottish FA notes the judgment of the Supreme Court and wishes to clarify the implications of this final legal decision from a football regulatory perspective.

 

In light of the Inner House of the Court of Session decision, the Board of the Scottish FA sought external senior counsel opinion to ensure a robust and independent consideration of all implications of today?s judgment.

 

The Board received written advice from Senior Counsel, amplified when the QC attended a full meeting of the Board to discuss his conclusions.

 

Specifically, Senior Counsel was asked to anticipate whether a determination in favour of HMRC, as announced today, could imply that there had been a breach of the Scottish FA?s Disciplinary Rules as they applied at the time of the EBT payments.

 

The clear opinion of Senior Counsel is that there is a very limited chance of the Scottish FA succeeding in relation to any complaint regarding this matter and that, even if successful, any sanctions available to a Judicial Panel would also be limited in their scope.

 

Accordingly, having had time to consider the opinion from Senior Counsel, and having examined the judgment of the UK Supreme Court, the Board has determined that no further disciplinary action should be taken by the Scottish FA at this time.

****ing hell. First time I've ever considered emailing the club, hopefully all fans of Scottish football stand up against this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kilmacolm Jambo

Basically saying their rule book is so shit that a half decent lawyer could drive a truck through it, so its not worth bothering.  What they're failing to acknowledge is there has been a clear breach of the spirit of the rules, even if its probable that they'd lose a legal challenge if it was appealed by Rangers. 

 

What they should be doing is bringing those charges and applying those sanctions anyway - I doubt Rangers have the finances right now to take it to court and even if they did and won surely the governing body needs to be seen to at least try to make the correct action.

 

The statement is a joke, as Oldco have been liquidated who could possibly challenge the decision to strip them of titles?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dusk_Till_Dawn

SFA statement - They are doing SFA

 

Scottish FA statement on Supreme Court ruling

Wednesday, 05 July 2017

 

 

The Board of the Scottish FA notes the judgment of the Supreme Court and wishes to clarify the implications of this final legal decision from a football regulatory perspective.

 

In light of the Inner House of the Court of Session decision, the Board of the Scottish FA sought external senior counsel opinion to ensure a robust and independent consideration of all implications of today?s judgment.

 

The Board received written advice from Senior Counsel, amplified when the QC attended a full meeting of the Board to discuss his conclusions.

 

Specifically, Senior Counsel was asked to anticipate whether a determination in favour of HMRC, as announced today, could imply that there had been a breach of the Scottish FA?s Disciplinary Rules as they applied at the time of the EBT payments.

 

The clear opinion of Senior Counsel is that there is a very limited chance of the Scottish FA succeeding in relation to any complaint regarding this matter and that, even if successful, any sanctions available to a Judicial Panel would also be limited in their scope.

 

Accordingly, having had time to consider the opinion from Senior Counsel, and having examined the judgment of the UK Supreme Court, the Board has determined that no further disciplinary action should be taken by the Scottish FA at this time.

 

:rofl:

 

You've got to hand it to them. No amount of public shame will stop them taking it up the Gary off the Huns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Rangers were stripped of their titles because of the EBT issue due to gaining a sporting advantage and given that Celtic in season 2004/5 also used EBT's then they also would not be able to benefit this leaves Hibernian as the league champions for the season given they finished 3rd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would love it if Rangers' insistence that they are the same club gave HMRC ammunition to pursue them as a Phoenix company.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:rofl:

 

You've got to hand it to them. No amount of public shame will stop them taking it up the Gary off the Huns.

Fans of all clubs need to petition their clubs to challenge this decision.  There at very least needs to be a detailed independent review with findings, not just a short statement saying that in their opinion there is no point in doing anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Diadora Van Basten

If Rangers were stripped of their titles because of the EBT issue due to gaining a sporting advantage and given that Celtic in season 2004/5 also used EBT's then they also would not be able to benefit this leaves Hibernian as the league champions for the season given they finished 3rd

Celtic paid the Tax on the EBT Rangers didn't.

 

Celtic used an EBT for one player for one season.

 

Rangers used it for 80 players for ten seasons.

 

They are not the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Celtic paid the Tax on the EBT Rangers didn't.

 

Celtic used an EBT for one player for one season.

 

Rangers used it for 80 players for ten seasons.

 

They are not the same.

Doesn't matter whether they paid it or not..it is about sporting advantage gained at the time and you cannot treat one club differently from the other unless you are a Celtic fan or have Celtic leanings as many on this subject clearly do

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IveSeenTheLight

Fans of all clubs need to petition their clubs to challenge this decision.  There at very least needs to be a detailed independent review with findings, not just a short statement saying that in their opinion there is no point in doing anything.

Totally agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter whether they paid it or not..it is about sporting advantage gained at the time and you cannot treat one club differently from the other unless you are a Celtic fan or have Celtic leanings as many on this subject clearly do

It is rather different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The statement is a joke, as Oldco have been liquidated who could possibly challenge the decision to strip them of titles?

 

You forget that Sevco 'bought' oldco's history so they would fight tooth and nail for the tainted trophies. The SMSM would also back their grubby darlings and the SFA had Rangers old boys in their organisation (Campbell Ogilvie who knew all about it, benefited from the scheme personally and kept schtum). And anybody wonders why the SFA are a bunch of self serving, supine knobends?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You forget that Sevco 'bought' oldco's history so they would fight tooth and nail for the tainted trophies. The SMSM would also back their grubby darlings and the SFA had Rangers old boys in their organisation (Campbell Ogilvie who knew all about it, benefited from the scheme personally and kept schtum). And anybody wonders why the SFA are a bunch of self serving, supine knobends?

People will still say the game here is not corrupt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter whether they paid it or not..it is about sporting advantage gained at the time and you cannot treat one club differently from the other unless you are a Celtic fan or have Celtic leanings as many on this subject clearly do

 

Shut the **** up you absolute twunt of a roaster.

 

I and everyone else on this thread would absolutely love to nail Celtic to the wall for using EBTs too.

Both clubs are being treated exactly the same in this analysis, and were treated the same at the time the enquiry opened in 2012.  But since you're so much smarter than all of us, please, explain how one EBT, issued as severance pay, which was disclosed to the footballing authorities (i.e. no side letter), on a player who never played for the club again after receiving the payment, constituted a sporting advantage. 

 

Oh what, they had the extra cash in the bank from not paying tax on it for three years?  At the end of that, they paid the tax with money they had in the bank.  You can google all that in five minutes if you want to quit pretending about who really has an agenda here.

 

So please, expound upon what players they employed whose wages they otherwise couldn't have afforded, what transfer fees they were able to pay they wouldn't have been able to otherwise, because they didn't pay tax that was probably in the five figures for an EBT for three years.  Apparently you've been under a rock the past five years while Rangers openly admitted to being able to get players they otherwise couldn't, then were liquidated because they couldn't pay their debts.  And were liquidated before being hit with the tax liability from this case.

 

Show us the sporting advantage.  Lay it out.  Go on, we'll wait.

 

Everyone else's ability to see all that clearly, and lament the fact that while Celtic used an EBT, they didn't do anything amounting to actionable rulebreaking, is not Celtic-mindedness.  It's being not a ****ing plank--pretty easy if you actually try.  What do you have to lose?  Go on, give it your best shot.

 

Unfortunately in this case, we have nothing to go on.  That Celtic have colluded with Rangers (and Sevco) for both their benefits over the rest of Scottish football for decades, that the club profit from and wink-wink encourage sectarianism and bigotry, that they have a mob of manky, violent shitheads for fans, well, we'll have to content ourselves with that for now.

 

If it someday comes down that Celtic have cheated to win, we'll all be there hoping they get their just deserts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...a bit disco

Doesn't matter whether they paid it or not..it is about sporting advantage gained at the time and you cannot treat one club differently from the other unless you are a Celtic fan or have Celtic leanings as many on this subject clearly do

 

And, by ****, You have exposed yourself with your "BUT, BUT, BUT, LOOK WHAT THE NASTY BIG CELTIC DONE". 

 

Blue is YOUR colour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Diadora Van Basten

What is the betting that the SFA's Senior Counsel is a Rangers fan?

My bet is it's the lawyer Hibs used regarding the cup final riot.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spellczech

Doesn't matter whether they paid it or not..it is about sporting advantage gained at the time and you cannot treat one club differently from the other unless you are a Celtic fan or have Celtic leanings as many on this subject clearly do

 

Is the capability to fund a squad of 20 players each on ?10k pw for 10 seasons not a sporting advantage?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

N Lincs Jambo

Here's a thought.

 

Oldco Rangers always argued that these payments were loans and not wages. BDO as liquidators are supposedly acting in the best interests of Oldco's creditors - why don't they launch a public campaign for these loans to be repaid BDO as the liquidators of Oldco? They are potentially looking at a windfall of ?47 Million which could probably more than compensate all of Oldco's creditors except for HMRC. HMRC should, at least in theory, have no ground to stand on as the loans were repaid and therefore do not attract tax.

 

Surely all these people who were paid these sums would repay these loans if they had the interest of Rangers at heart???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bazzas right boot

Reference Titles

 

Not the fans.

 

But if the fans want Rangers stripped of all titles. Every team should refuse to take the pitch, plan a weekend and the clubs should do it, evey club across Scotland.

 

There should be a consultation process with the fans from each club to get their opinion, afterwards a meeting between all the teams and if the fans of the clubs want action, take the above action. let the SFA know what needs to be done to prevent such actions, set a date.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spellczech

Reference Titles

 

Not the fans.

 

But if the fans want Rangers stripped of all titles. Every team should refuse to take the pitch, plan a weekend and the clubs should do it, evey club across Scotland.

 

There should be a consultation process with the fans from each club to get their opinion, afterwards a meeting between all the teams and if the fans of the clubs want action, take the above action. let the SFA know what needs to be done to prevent such actions, set a date.

Then the SFA would say all the other clubs have forfeited their challenge and award another title to Rangers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bazzas right boot

Doesn't matter whether they paid it or not..it is about sporting advantage gained at the time and you cannot treat one club differently from the other unless you are a Celtic fan or have Celtic leanings as many on this subject clearly do

 

 

Nah, youve taken it to far, if the tax has been paid why would you strip titles?

 

Are we getting stripped of or 06 SC and second place finsh because we were in debt ( goy players on tic?), ultamatley a debt we never paid?

 

Is every club that has a late payment or ever been in debt getting thier titles stripped?

 

Rangers done it for over 10 years, never paid the tax on it. Not difficult to see the difference and the need for action. If they had paid their tax on it they wouldn't have went bust, they taken the liquidation option as they knew they could never pay back what they owed. Big difference. Like a dodgy two bit company that changes names every 3 years to avoid their debts and taxes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bazzas right boot

Then the SFA would say all the other clubs have forfeited their challenge and award another title to Rangers!

 

No they wouldn't .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joey J J Jr Shabadoo

Fans of all clubs need to petition their clubs to challenge this decision.  There at very least needs to be a detailed independent review with findings, not just a short statement saying that in their opinion there is no point in doing anything.

 

I've e-mailed Hearts, asking them for their thoughts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Daydream Believer

SFA statement - They are doing SFA

 

Scottish FA statement on Supreme Court ruling

Wednesday, 05 July 2017

 

 

The Board of the Scottish FA notes the judgment of the Supreme Court and wishes to clarify the implications of this final legal decision from a football regulatory perspective.

 

In light of the Inner House of the Court of Session decision, the Board of the Scottish FA sought external senior counsel opinion to ensure a robust and independent consideration of all implications of today?s judgment.

 

The Board received written advice from Senior Counsel, amplified when the QC attended a full meeting of the Board to discuss his conclusions.

 

Specifically, Senior Counsel was asked to anticipate whether a determination in favour of HMRC, as announced today, could imply that there had been a breach of the Scottish FA?s Disciplinary Rules as they applied at the time of the EBT payments.

 

The clear opinion of Senior Counsel is that there is a very limited chance of the Scottish FA succeeding in relation to any complaint regarding this matter and that, even if successful, any sanctions available to a Judicial Panel would also be limited in their scope.

 

Accordingly, having had time to consider the opinion from Senior Counsel, and having examined the judgment of the UK Supreme Court, the Board has determined that no further disciplinary action should be taken by the Scottish FA at this time.

 

If you perfectly phrase a question to Senior Counsel then you tend to get the answer you want to hear - (As demonstrated by SDM who had "consistent advice" form his counsel before subsequently having his trousers taken down by HMRC)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Daydream Believer

Here's a thought.

 

Oldco Rangers always argued that these payments were loans and not wages. BDO as liquidators are supposedly acting in the best interests of Oldco's creditors - why don't they launch a public campaign for these loans to be repaid BDO as the liquidators of Oldco? They are potentially looking at a windfall of ?47 Million which could probably more than compensate all of Oldco's creditors except for HMRC. HMRC should, at least in theory, have no ground to stand on as the loans were repaid and therefore do not attract tax.

 

Surely all these people who were paid these sums would repay these loans if they had the interest of Rangers at heart???

 

Unfortunately even if they were loans, they were owed to some offshore trust rather than to Oldco.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Toxteth O'Grady

If the titles for the cheating years are not removed I will take no further part in Scottish Football

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jambo 4 Ever

If the titles for the cheating years are not removed I will take no further part in Scottish Football

Oh well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shut the **** up you absolute twunt of a roaster.

 

I and everyone else on this thread would absolutely love to nail Celtic to the wall for using EBTs too.

Both clubs are being treated exactly the same in this analysis, and were treated the same at the time the enquiry opened in 2012.  But since you're so much smarter than all of us, please, explain how one EBT, issued as severance pay, which was disclosed to the footballing authorities (i.e. no side letter), on a player who never played for the club again after receiving the payment, constituted a sporting advantage. 

 

Oh what, they had the extra cash in the bank from not paying tax on it for three years?  At the end of that, they paid the tax with money they had in the bank.  You can google all that in five minutes if you want to quit pretending about who really has an agenda here.

 

So please, expound upon what players they employed whose wages they otherwise couldn't have afforded, what transfer fees they were able to pay they wouldn't have been able to otherwise, because they didn't pay tax that was probably in the five figures for an EBT for three years.  Apparently you've been under a rock the past five years while Rangers openly admitted to being able to get players they otherwise couldn't, then were liquidated because they couldn't pay their debts.  And were liquidated before being hit with the tax liability from this case.

 

Show us the sporting advantage.  Lay it out.  Go on, we'll wait.

 

Everyone else's ability to see all that clearly, and lament the fact that while Celtic used an EBT, they didn't do anything amounting to actionable rulebreaking, is not Celtic-mindedness.  It's being not a ******* plank--pretty easy if you actually try.  What do you have to lose?  Go on, give it your best shot.

 

Unfortunately in this case, we have nothing to go on.  That Celtic have colluded with Rangers (and Sevco) for both their benefits over the rest of Scottish football for decades, that the club profit from and wink-wink encourage sectarianism and bigotry, that they have a mob of manky, violent shitheads for fans, well, we'll have to content ourselves with that for now.

 

If it someday comes down that Celtic have cheated to win, we'll all be there hoping they get their just deserts.

So signing a player with use of an EBT and having him perform for the club is not a sporting advantage ?

 

Then by your own argument Rangers had no sporting advantage so what's the fuss about ?

 

Common sense will overcome passionate but misguided responses every day

 

It's sad that you are unable to converse with those who disagree with you but your language and discourse clearly show you may not be able to follow the discussion so we'll let you off this time

 

I've said it before and will do again too many are simply following their Celtic minded 'friends' without thinking for themselves and you are doing the same making excuses for Celtic when for one season they were equally as guilty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will cause utter outrage and tip some over the edge at the idea, but genuinely, stripping title will have little to no effect. Its future punishment that would be suitable, but then the SFA would find themselves between a rock and hard place on that one, and its pretty obvious why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

socrates82

So signing a player with use of an EBT and having him perform for the club is not a sporting advantage ?

 

Then by your own argument Rangers had no sporting advantage so what's the fuss about ?

 

Common sense will overcome passionate but misguided responses every day

 

It's sad that you are unable to converse with those who disagree with you but your language and discourse clearly show you may not be able to follow the discussion so we'll let you off this time

 

I've said it before and will do again too many are simply following their Celtic minded 'friends' without thinking for themselves and you are doing the same making excuses for Celtic when for one season they were equally as guilty.

 

Key words: "For one season". EBTs it seemed were thought to be an accepted practice, or at least their use seemed murky from what I understand (which isn't much like most non-financial people). Celtic to their credit realised they weren't. Rangers seem to have think they'd struck gold...

 

Sure go back and fine Celtic but what Rangers have done is on a different level to anyone else unless you can prove otherwise. I agree that Celtic and Rangers as the OF deserve to be lumped together for some reasons - their fans and their influence for example. However, Rangers are worse in every respect - fans, greater influence with blazer and media... we all know this.

Edited by socrates82
Link to comment
Share on other sites

socrates82

It will cause utter outrage and tip some over the edge at the idea, but genuinely, stripping title will have little to no effect. Its future punishment that would be suitable, but then the SFA would find themselves between a rock and hard place on that one, and its pretty obvious why.

 

It wouldn't redress the balance for teams that lost out because of what Rangers did, but it would be a major stain - i.e. better than nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the rule thats been broken was that the payments to the players were not disclosed as part of their registered contracts. I.e. Secret payments.

Whether or not tax was paid is irrelevant to that rule.

rangers cheated plain and simple.

Our clubs will stand back and do nothing.

It is up to the fans to do something and I really don't know if there is an appetite for it through a lack of real knowledge of what went on.

This is a sporting scandal as big as any sporting scandal anywhere in the world. But the power of rangers is far reaching and it will take a massive movement to get any justice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So signing a player with use of an EBT and having him perform for the club is not a sporting advantage ?

 

Then by your own argument Rangers had no sporting advantage so what's the fuss about ?

 

Common sense will overcome passionate but misguided responses every day

 

It's sad that you are unable to converse with those who disagree with you but your language and discourse clearly show you may not be able to follow the discussion so we'll let you off this time

 

I've said it before and will do again too many are simply following their Celtic minded 'friends' without thinking for themselves and you are doing the same making excuses for Celtic when for one season they were equally as guilty.

 

You can't show a sporting advantage, so you've mischaracterised the EBT in question (it was a severance payment after which he never played for the club again) and concluded based on that intentional mischaracterisation that your beloved club had no sporting advantage.

 

I haven't had to make any excuses for Celtic because you haven't shown a sporting advantage gained by them.  If you would like to go ahead and do that now, so that there's something of substance to actually discuss, instead of you trying to whatabout deflect from your beloved club's disgrace in-between sobs into your sash, feel free.

 

Or just continue failing.  You excel at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jamboelite

Shut the **** up you absolute twunt of a roaster.

 

I and everyone else on this thread would absolutely love to nail Celtic to the wall for using EBTs too.

Both clubs are being treated exactly the same in this analysis, and were treated the same at the time the enquiry opened in 2012. But since you're so much smarter than all of us, please, explain how one EBT, issued as severance pay, which was disclosed to the footballing authorities (i.e. no side letter), on a player who never played for the club again after receiving the payment, constituted a sporting advantage.

 

Oh what, they had the extra cash in the bank from not paying tax on it for three years? At the end of that, they paid the tax with money they had in the bank. You can google all that in five minutes if you want to quit pretending about who really has an agenda here.

 

So please, expound upon what players they employed whose wages they otherwise couldn't have afforded, what transfer fees they were able to pay they wouldn't have been able to otherwise, because they didn't pay tax that was probably in the five figures for an EBT for three years. Apparently you've been under a rock the past five years while Rangers openly admitted to being able to get players they otherwise couldn't, then were liquidated because they couldn't pay their debts. And were liquidated before being hit with the tax liability from this case.

 

Show us the sporting advantage. Lay it out. Go on, we'll wait.

 

Everyone else's ability to see all that clearly, and lament the fact that while Celtic used an EBT, they didn't do anything amounting to actionable rulebreaking, is not Celtic-mindedness. It's being not a ******* plank--pretty easy if you actually try. What do you have to lose? Go on, give it your best shot.

 

Unfortunately in this case, we have nothing to go on. That Celtic have colluded with Rangers (and Sevco) for both their benefits over the rest of Scottish football for decades, that the club profit from and wink-wink encourage sectarianism and bigotry, that they have a mob of manky, violent shitheads for fans, well, we'll have to content ourselves with that for now.

 

If it someday comes down that Celtic have cheated to win, we'll all be there hoping they get their just deserts.

Take a bow brilliantly put.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

alwaysthereinspirit

So signing a player with use of an EBT and having him perform for the club is not a sporting advantage ?

 

Then by your own argument Rangers had no sporting advantage so what's the fuss about ?

 

Common sense will overcome passionate but misguided responses every day

 

It's sad that you are unable to converse with those who disagree with you but your language and discourse clearly show you may not be able to follow the discussion so we'll let you off this time

 

I've said it before and will do again too many are simply following their Celtic minded 'friends' without thinking for themselves and you are doing the same making excuses for Celtic when for one season they were equally as guilty.

We get it. You love Newco and despise Celtic. At one time you at least tried to hide the obvious. Today you finally cracked. Even the bluest of blue noses have no answer to todays ruling but for a lot of whataboutism. Classis diversionary tactics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Maple Leaf locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...