The Rangers soap opera goes on and on.

[Deek]

as for this i could not give a feck

 

 

 

Can we launch this bigot brother back to League 3 please?

Edited November 21, 2012 by Deek

[DETTY29]

Lloyds wanted their money back as they themselves had been up shit creek. Murray wanted out as well as things were going up shit creek for him. That's hypothetical straw clutching at best.

 

Thats even assuming that the BTC hadn't come about. The reason the BTC came about was because of Rangers use of EBT's. The only way to say Whyte would have never been in is if Rangers hadn't used a (for the most part) legal but extremely distasteful and complex tax avoidance scheme. Unfortunately they did though.

Maybe I'm being very simplistic here, but aren't Ranges where they are today because of SDMs/MIH/Rangers use of these EBTs.

 

Wonder where they would be now if they hadn't used them?

 

Rangers used a tax avoidance scheme which in the face of it was very distasteful and to the ordinary joe in the street is a complete scam which Hector was entitled to challenge.

 

Murray played poker with Hector, blinked first, eventually 'won' but at what cost?

 

The Rangers fans ire should be primarily aimed at Murray. Not some blogger or fans of other clubs,the SFA or the SPL. All we should ask ever ask is that all clubs are treated the same way. Every fan of every club (unless it's their own) believe a liquidated club should start again from the bottom. Rangers were liquidated, that is a fact. How they got there doesn't matter and it was down to the decisions of the custodians of the club. It's harsh on fans, but that's they way it is.

 

If, and it is a big if, Rangers are found guilty of having mis-registered players, unless they are serious extenuating circumstances, the mis registering of one player in a game is a 3.0 loss - so stripping of titles is very much a potential punishment.

 

And while it would be a severe kick in the nuts, we run the same risks with our tax reduction/avoidance/evasion accusations.

Edited November 21, 2012 by DETTY29

[shaun.lawson]

 

And while it would be a severe kick in the nuts, we run the same risks with our tax reduction/avoidance/evasion accusations.

 

Correct. For this reason, I'm absolutely astonished at how many on this thread are still demanding sporting sanctions.

 

Have they never heard of legal precedents, or something?

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Really is sad ..., my only fear is that we are being led down a garden path by Vlad ... HEARTS HEARTS Glorious

Hearts .. remember them

 

I think you join your 1 post pal in the pisspoor troll school.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Correct. For this reason, I'm absolutely astonished at how many on this thread are still demanding sporting sanctions.

 

Have they never heard of legal precedents, or something?

 

If we have done wrong, we take the consequences. I'm not going to be a hypocrite about it.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Lloyds would not got such itchy feet and Rangers would have continued to chip away at the debt.

 

Lloyds are nursing the whole MIH debt mountain and wanted shot of part of it (RFCRIP) when they saw an opportunity to do so.

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

The good guys never stayed in Castle Greyskull... Well, apart from the Sorceress. I feel that this is important.

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

Double

Edited November 21, 2012 by Shaun William Ryder

[Seymour M Hersh]

alastair johnston reckons that the punishment for dual contracts will be a slap on the wrists

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/20431849

 

 

I'd be surprised if it's as draconian as a slap on the wrists.

[The Gasman]

 

Correct. For this reason, I'm absolutely astonished at how many on this thread are still demanding sporting sanctions.

 

Have they never heard of legal precedents, or something?

 

A legal precedent for a sporting sanction..?

[Rocco_Jambo]

Maybe I'm being very simplistic here, but aren't Ranges where they are today because of SDMs/MIH/Rangers use of these EBTs.

 

Wonder where they would be now if they hadn't used them?

 

Rangers used a tax avoidance scheme which in the face of it was very distasteful and to the ordinary joe in the street is a complete scam which Hector was entitled to challenge.

 

Murray played poker with Hector, blinked first, eventually 'won' but at what cost?

 

The Rangers fans ire should be primarily aimed at Murray. Not some blogger or fans of other clubs,the SFA or the SPL. All we should ask ever ask is that all clubs are treated the same way. Every fan of every club (unless it's their own) believe a liquidated club should start again from the bottom. Rangers were liquidated, that is a fact. How they got there doesn't matter and it was down to the decisions of the custodians of the club. It's harsh on fans, but that's they way it is.

 

If, and it is a big if, Rangers are found guilty of having mis-registered players, unless they are serious extenuating circumstances, the mis registering of one player in a game is a 3.0 loss - so stripping of titles is very much a potential punishment.

 

And while it would be a severe kick in the nuts, we run the same risks with our tax reduction/avoidance/evasion accusations.

 

No I think that's bang on. Rangers took a risk by using EBT's. It was a highly complex controversial tax avoidance scheme which allowed them to entice players they couldnt have otherwise afforded. It was perfectly (for the most part) legal and isn't sporting cheating as far as I'm concerned. However they took a risk by using this scheme of tax avoidance like every business decision. They enjoyed the benefits and now don't want to have anything to do with the consequences. A lot of people clearly including owners and directors weren't sure if the case would go against them and people can hardly understand why it was legal given it allowed millionaires to avoid paying tax.

 

Had Rangers had a bit more money and been a bit more financially astute in the last couple of years they may have been able to survive until the result of this tribunal and this scheme would have been distasteful but extremely clever. In the end it resulted in bringing them down so not so clever. HMRC given the current climate were perfectly entitled IMO to go after this as it looks dodgy as hell. (so does our tax case to a lesser extent)

[davieholt]

Correct. For this reason, I'm absolutely astonished at how many on this thread are still demanding sporting sanctions.

 

Have they never heard of legal precedents, or something?

 

What a strange thing to say Shaun.

 

I hope we would all be consistent here. If Rangers cheated (Hector and the footballing authorities) then natural justice demands penalties. If Hearts cheated in any way, I would expect us to be dealt with in a similar manner. For the record I believe the huns to be guilty as sin and it is only my complete ignorance of the details of the case against Hearts which precludes me from taking a similar view at this time. The only difference is I believe Hearts potential problem lies with Hector and not the SPL although I could be wrong.

[shaun.lawson]

What a strange thing to say Shaun.

 

I hope we would all be consistent here. If Rangers cheated (Hector and the footballing authorities) then natural justice demands penalties. If Hearts cheated in any way, I would expect us to be dealt with in a similar manner. For the record I believe the huns to be guilty as sin and it is only my complete ignorance of the details of the case against Hearts which precludes me from taking a similar view at this time. The only difference is I believe Hearts potential problem lies with Hector and not the SPL although I could be wrong.

 

To clarify: I completely agree with you.

 

But you seriously think most Hearts fans would, in the event of the tax case being lost and the bill not being paid, just happily renounce the 2006 Scottish Cup win and Champions League qualification?

 

Not just that - but if we'd paid HMRC when we should have paid them, would we have had the money available for even last season's team? If the tax case is lost, just watch the narrative develop amongst fans of all other Scottish clubs.

[Rocco_Jambo]

To clarify: I completely agree with you.

 

But you seriously think most Hearts fans would, in the event of the tax case being lost and the bill not being paid, just happily renounce the 2006 Scottish Cup win and Champions League qualification?

 

Not just that - but if we'd paid HMRC when we should have paid them, would we have had the money available for even last season's team? If the tax case is lost, just watch the narrative develop amongst fans of all other Scottish clubs.

 

Is there an investigation by the SPL, SFA that we don't know about re our 2006 win? We haven't been billed by HMRC until this year for our TC. If we don't pay our tax bills it will be extremely embarrassing but theres no suggestion we have done wrong apart from pay tax bills.

[skull]

Can we launch this bigot brother back to League 3 please?

 

yawn ...

[shaun.lawson]

Is there an investigation by the SPL, SFA that we don't know about re our 2006 win? We haven't been billed by HMRC until this year for our TC. If we don't pay our tax bills it will be extremely embarrassing but theres no suggestion we have done wrong apart from pay tax bills.

 

The investigation relates to tax we didn't pay on players we used in 05/6 and afterwards. As previous accounts have stated, the investigation has been ongoing for a very considerable time.

 

Were the case to be lost, profiting on the football pitch from tax evasion would not exactly look too clever.

Edited November 21, 2012 by shaun.lawson

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

The investigation relates to tax we didn't pay on players we used in 05/6 and afterwards. As previous accounts have stated, the investigation has been ongoing for a very considerable time.

 

Were the case to be lost, profiting on the football pitch from tax evasion would not exactly look too clever.

 

Shaun, you have fallen into the classic trap.

 

In the case of RFCRIP, the SPL investigation relates to 'dual contracts' which in effect are under the counter payments. The BTC verdict shows that this happened in 35 instances. What we don't know is who those 35 individuals are. Under the counter payments = ineligible players = 3-0 defeat by UEFA rule for that game.

 

The Hearts BTC relates not to dual contracts but the amount of tax paid in the residency of the UK of players signed to Kaunas and immediately loaned to Hearts. There is no evidence of 'under the counter' payments that would break SPL rules.

[skull]

I think you join your 1 post pal in the pisspoor troll school.

 

1000 po

The good guys never stayed in Castle Greyskull... Well, apart from the Sorceress. I feel that this is important.

 

do people on this forum just make things up ...Castle Grayskull, the source of He-Man's great power.

 

 

 

Castle Grayskull is a fortress located on the fictional planet Eternia. It forms a central location in the Masters of the Universe toy/comic/animation universe, and also appears in the 1987 live action adaptation.

In the series, it is the target of numerous attacks by Skeletor, Hordak and the Snake Men, all of whom believe that the secrets inside will allow them to conquer Eternia and become the titular Masters of the Universe

 

why dont you just call me a bigot , seems to be the way if i dont agree with someone ...

[DETTY29]

To clarify: I completely agree with you.

 

But you seriously think most Hearts fans would, in the event of the tax case being lost and the bill not being paid, just happily renounce the 2006 Scottish Cup win and Champions League qualification?

 

Not just that - but if we'd paid HMRC when we should have paid them, would we have had the money available for even last season's team? If the tax case is lost, just watch the narrative develop amongst fans of all other Scottish clubs.

Maybe I didn't make myself clear.

 

I believe everyone should be treated the same under similar circumstances. It's the basis of case law and precedent, both legally and in sport.

 

If Hearts are found guilty of non payment of tax, cannot pay and face administration/liquidation, the sanctions are points deduction in the event of administration - and in the event of liquidation, have the ability to re-apply to the leagues if certain criteria can be met. No stripping of cup wins.

 

If however, players have dual contracts /side letters that contravened the SFA/SPL rules and meant players were unregistered we have to face the risk of the results of matches being over turned.

 

If you don't believe in that, then you should never for example, take up jury duty. He's innocent me lud, because for the grace of god that might have been me.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

1000 po

 

 

do people on this forum just make things up ...Castle Grayskull, the source of He-Man's great power.

 

 

 

Castle Grayskull is a fortress located on the fictional planet Eternia. It forms a central location in the Masters of the Universe toy/comic/animation universe, and also appears in the 1987 live action adaptation.

In the series, it is the target of numerous attacks by Skeletor, Hordak and the Snake Men, all of whom believe that the secrets inside will allow them to conquer Eternia and become the titular Masters of the Universe

 

why dont you just call me a bigot , seems to be the way if i dont agree with someone ...

 

Er, please don't drag me into your He-Man discussion.

 

Now, about the 35 players who received contractual payments via EBT's?

[Rocco_Jambo]

The investigation relates to tax we didn't pay on players we used in 05/6 and afterwards. As previous accounts have stated, the investigation has been ongoing for a very considerable time.

 

Were the case to be lost, profiting on the football pitch from tax evasion would not exactly look too clever.

 

 

The investigation relates to tax we didn't pay on players we used in 05/6 and afterwards. As previous accounts have stated, the investigation has been ongoing for a very considerable time.

 

Were the case to be lost, profiting on the football pitch from tax evasion would not exactly look too clever.

 

What on earth has the tax tribunal got to do with the 2006 cup win though? The case is nothing to do with tax evasion. They have billed us and said we owe this and we have appealed it. If we lose and don't pay then yes we should be pilloried like Rangers for being tax cheats but until that there is no issue.

[Jammy T]

Er, please don't drag me into your He-Man discussion.

 

Now, about the 35 players who received contractual payments via EBT's?

 

She-male morelike - its a Govan thing...

[Dirty Deeds]

Must confess I've never given two hoots about stripping titles off Rangers. The High Dallas / Andy Davies / Miko incident happened about 20 yards from me.

 

I already new they were cheats.

 

As for the tax case, looks like the bloggers aligned the facts to what they wanted to happen. More fool us for taking their opinion as fact.

 

I also don't care if Rangers make it back to the top league early - as long as it's a 16 team league with a fair voting structure and even split of cash, football fans will have won.

Edited November 21, 2012 by Dirty Deeds

[skull]

Er, please don't drag me into your He-Man discussion.

 

Now, about the 35 players who received contractual payments via EBT's?

 

it seems every night you sit and post non stop about sevco , seriously get a fecking life you sad sad person

[flecktimus]

it seems every night you sit and post non stop about sevco , seriously get a fecking life you sad sad person

 

Tick Tock

[shaun.lawson]

Shaun, you have fallen into the classic trap.

 

In the case of RFCRIP, the SPL investigation relates to 'dual contracts' which in effect are under the counter payments. The BTC verdict shows that this happened in 35 instances. What we don't know is who those 35 individuals are. Under the counter payments = ineligible players = 3-0 defeat by UEFA rule for that game.

 

The Hearts BTC relates not to dual contracts but the amount of tax paid in the residency of the UK of players signed to Kaunas and immediately loaned to Hearts. There is no evidence of 'under the counter' payments that would break SPL rules.

 

Yes, I know the SPL investigation into Rangers relates to dual contracts. But in the eyes of Joe Public - who for the sake of the sport's credibility, need to retain at least some sense of clubs competing in a fair way (especially when it comes to not ripping off the honest taxpayer), it is intimately related to - indeed, practically indivisible from - the Big Tax Case: which yesterday, Rangers partially won.

 

Perception is just as important as anything else in a case like this - so imagine if the SPL pressed ahead, found Rangers guilty of dual contracts, and still imposed sporting sanctions... all after the club partially won their tax case! If Hearts then lost ours, what do you think the perception of just about everyone else will be?

 

If Hearts, by failing to pay money we owed the exchequer when it was due - in fact. failing to pay it for many years - directly profited from this on the pitch in the form of trophies, prize money and CL qualification, the perception would be that we're every bit as culpable as Rangers. We'd just better bloody well hope that our tax case is won.

Edited November 21, 2012 by shaun.lawson

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

it seems every night you sit and post non stop about sevco , seriously get a fecking life you sad sad person

 

 

If you don't like this thread, there are plenty of others you can talk about Hearts on. Oh, wait...

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Yes, I know the SPL investigation into Rangers relates to dual contracts. But in the eyes of Joe Public - who for the sake of the sport's credibility, need to retain at least some sense of clubs competing in a fair way (especially when it comes to not ripping off the honest taxpayer), it is intimately related to - indeed, practically indivisible from - the Big Tax Case: which yesterday, Rangers partially won.

 

Perception is just as important as anything else in a case like this - so imagine if the SPL pressed ahead, found Rangers guilty of dual contracts, and still imposed sporting sanctions... all after the club partially won their tax case! If Hearts then lost ours, what do you think the perception of just about everyone else will be?

 

If Hearts, by failing to pay money we owed the exchequer when it was due - in fact. failing to pay it for many years - directly profited from this on the pitch in the form of trophies, prize money and CL qualification, the perception will be that we're every bit as culpable as Rangers. We'd just better bloody well hope that our tax case is won.

 

 

If Hearts lose their case, Hearts have two choices.

 

1. Pay the outstanding tax

2. Fail to pay and create an insolvency event

 

Hearts will have broken no sporting rules. That's the difference. It is not the amount of tax RFCRIP paid or didn't pay, it is how their players were registered that is the issue.

[skull]

Yes, I know the SPL investigation into Rangers relates to dual contracts. But in the eyes of Joe Public - who for the sake of the sport's credibility, need to retain at least some sense of clubs competing in a fair way (especially when it comes to not ripping off the honest taxpayer), it is intimately related to - indeed, practically indivisible from - the Big Tax Case: which yesterday, Rangers partially won.

 

Perception is just as important as anything else in a case like this - so imagine if the SPL pressed ahead, found Rangers guilty of dual contracts, and still imposed sporting sanctions... all after the club partially won their tax case! If Hearts then lost ours, what do you think the perception of just about everyone else will be?

 

If Hearts, by failing to pay money we owed the exchequer when it was due - in fact. failing to pay it for many years - directly profited from this on the pitch in the form of trophies, prize money and CL qualification, the perception will be that we're every bit as culpable as Rangers. We'd just better bloody well hope that our tax case is won.

 

for some it does not mater if will be detrimental to Hearts , as long as sevco get hammered ,

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

for some it does not mater if will be detrimental to Hearts , as long as sevco get hammered ,

 

No, it is called being consistent.

 

Do I want HMFC to lose their tax case? Of course not. If it happens, it happens. I can't influence it.

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

Nut, sorry, I'm no having that Skull.

 

He-Man lived in the Royal Palace of Eternia as his alias; Prince Adam. The only inhabitant of Greyskull was The Sorceress... He-Man maybe had a granny-flat at the back of it or something but it was never mentioned.

 

Bigot.

[davieholt]

for some it does not mater if will be detrimental to Hearts , as long as sevco get hammered ,

for some it does not mater if will be detrimental to Hearts , as long as sevco get hammered ,

 

What an abysmally stupid statement.

[shaun.lawson]

 

If Hearts lose their case, Hearts have two choices.

 

1. Pay the outstanding tax

2. Fail to pay and create an insolvency event

 

Hearts will have broken no sporting rules. That's the difference. It is not the amount of tax RFCRIP paid or didn't pay, it is how their players were registered that is the issue.

 

I don't think sporting rules allow football clubs to break the law, Geoff.

 

If we lose the tax case, we'd have signed and paid players who helped us win trophies and considerable prize money with money which wasn't ours to begin with.

 

How difficult is this to grasp?

[Tiberius Stinkfinger]

I don't think sporting rules allow football clubs to break the law, Geoff.

 

If we lose the tax case, we'd have signed and paid players who helped us win trophies and considerable prize money with money which wasn't ours to begin with.

 

How difficult is this to grasp?

 

"Break the law" ??

 

Christ just fell off his bike.

 

You really are turning into the Harbinger of Doom.

 

Why haven't HMRC issued a winding up petition for the outstanding debt the club owes from 2006 or whatever it was ??

[Deek]

 

yawn ...

 

Is it boring singing about how old and beautiful you are as you protect Derrys walls.

 

Perhaps the Pope could have saved you from the Tax mans claws if you had

prayed to him.

 

But ways remember you are one of the people, the people that the rest of Scotland has stuck two fingers up to.

 

Jog on my friend.

[davieholt]

I don't think sporting rules allow football clubs to break the law, Geoff.

 

If we lose the tax case, we'd have signed and paid players who helped us win trophies and considerable prize money with money which wasn't ours to begin with.

 

How difficult is this to grasp?

 

Too simplistic Shaun. In 2005/06 Vlad's ego was such that he would have paid the tax quite happily if he was told he had to. The fact is he reckoned that the loan arrangements were quite within the tax laws and proceeded on that basis. If it transpires that his interpretation was wrong and Hearts ARE, in fact due Hector then we have to deal with it. But, crucially, Hearts did not hide side letters or anything else (as far as I'm aware) in order to mislead HMRC or the footballing authorities. Even orcs would see the distinction if they had an IQ over 50

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

 

 

I don't think sporting rules allow football clubs to break the law, Geoff.

 

If we lose the tax case, we'd have signed and paid players who helped us win trophies and considerable prize money with money which wasn't ours to begin with.

 

How difficult is this to grasp?

Shaun, what laws will Hearts have broken? They have tried to.minimise tax and Hector has said no you can't do that.

 

And you can't use the players we could not have afforded argument because you don't know if Vlad would simply have paid the additional tax at the time. If there was a salary cap as a sporting rule then you would have a point.

 

Put it this way, if RFCRIP had registered their players correctly and simply paid them via EBT'S, they would have lost the tax case but would have no case to answer on the sporting rules.

[skull]

What an abysmally stupid statement.

 

 

maybe you should read the thread ,

some of the posts are absmally stupid i agree

[skull]

Is it boring singing about how old and beautiful you are as you protect Derrys walls.

 

Perhaps the Pope could have saved you from the Tax mans claws if you had

prayed to him.

 

But ways remember you are one of the people, the people that the rest of Scotland has stuck two fingers up to.

 

Jog on my friend.

 

ha ha made me laugh...awwww you looking for friends , jog on Nigel

[DETTY29]

for some it does not mater if will be detrimental to Hearts , as long as sevco get hammered ,

If you think SevCo got it hard on here, imagine if it had been Celtic?

 

And if any Rangers/SevCo fan says they would have given Celtic the benefit of doubt on EBTs and if found guilty of having unregistered players, accept the results because it's what the 'players do on the pitch' would as a mate used to say,

 

'be nothing but a two faced dog'

[The Gasman]

 

I don't think sporting rules allow football clubs to break the law, Geoff.

 

If we lose the tax case, we'd have signed and paid players who helped us win trophies and considerable prize money with money which wasn't ours to begin with.

 

How difficult is this to grasp?

 

 

Going by your "logic" every single football club with any debt or mortgage, is cheating, by using money which isn't actually theirs.

 

Give up Shaun, you're having a mare..!

[Francis Albert]

I don't think sporting rules allow football clubs to break the law, Geoff.

 

If we lose the tax case, we'd have signed and paid players who helped us win trophies and considerable prize money with money which wasn't ours to begin with.

 

How difficult is this to grasp?

 

 

On the tax issue, we will only have fallen foul (1) if we lose the tax case and (2) if we then fail to pay.

 

As for sporting sanctions, no-one has faced or is facing sporting sanctions for failure to pay tax.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

If Shaun is consistent, he will also demand we rescind the 1998 Cup win, since we lost ?2m that year. What say you Mr Lawson?

[DETTY29]

On the tax issue, we will only have fallen foul (1) if we lose the tax case and (2) if we then fail to pay.

 

As for sporting sanctions, no-one has faced or is facing sporting sanctions for failure to pay tax.

Exactly.

 

You would face sporting sanctions if you faced a full insolvency event such as administration or liquidation.

 

To my knowledge we haven't, but Rangers have.

 

Rangers have been accused of mis-regisering players of which the SPL lawyers believe there is a pram facie case to answer, which will go in front of a completely Independent Commission.

 

Again we haven't been accused but i'm sure some fans of other clubs, and most definitely SevCo ones and some MSM will do. But it would appear we are a long way off having a formal complaint in this regard, and further away from a prima facie case to answer. Fortunately.

 

Why is that all so difficult to understand?

 

EDIT - should add under Financial Fair Play certain payments must be up to date at certain times, which may include certain tax bills not under challenge/appeal. All ifs, buts and maybes though.

Edited November 22, 2012 by DETTY29

[shaun.lawson]

 

Going by your "logic" every single football club with any debt or mortgage, is cheating, by using money which isn't actually theirs.

 

Give up Shaun, you're having a mare..!

If Shaun is consistent, he will also demand we rescind the 1998 Cup win, since we lost ?2m that year. What say you Mr Lawson?

 

Er, no.

 

There's a quite colossal difference between the standard spending beyond a club's natural means which absolute shedloads of clubs do throughout the UK and Europe; and taking money which is the property of the taxpayer, and using it to improve results on the pitch. The moral difference between the two is monumental - and beyond that, while the former may or may not imperil the club's position in time (it all depends on the benefactor, and the assets), the latter denies the taxp?yer money they are owed.

 

Of course, it remains to be seen if that money was the property of the taxpayer or not. If it was, we have a problem - a credibility problem if we pay it back; an insolvency one if we don't.

Edited November 22, 2012 by shaun.lawson

[shaun.lawson]

"Break the law" ??

 

Christ just fell off his bike.

 

You really are turning into the Harbinger of Doom.

 

Why haven't HMRC issued a winding up petition for the outstanding debt the club owes from 2006 or whatever it was ??

 

Because it hasn't been established if we owe it yet. That's what the tribunal will decide.

[Pistol1874]

 

 

 

Er, no.

 

There's a quite colossal difference between the standard spending beyond a club's natural means which absolute shedloads of clubs do throughout the UK and Europe; and taking money which is the property of the taxpayer, and using it to improve results on the pitch. The moral difference between the two is monumental - and beyond that, while the former may or may not imperil the club's position in time (it all depends on the benefactor, and the assets), the latter denies the taxp?yer money they are owed.

 

Of course, it remains to be seen if that money was the property of the taxpayer or not. If it was, we have a problem - a credibility problem if we pay it back; an insolvency one if we don't.

Many clubs use monies due to HMRC as working capital effectively. Ultimately, using your value judgements, once a club has debt, it's just down to degrees of cheating.

I'm not saying you're wrong necessarily btw.

 

[Francis Albert]

Er, no.

 

There's a quite colossal difference between the standard spending beyond a club's natural means which absolute shedloads of clubs do throughout the UK and Europe; and taking money which is the property of the taxpayer, and using it to improve results on the pitch. The moral difference between the two is monumental - and beyond that, while the former may or may not imperil the club's position in time (it all depends on the benefactor, and the assets), the latter denies the taxp?yer money they are owed.

 

Of course, it remains to be seen if that money was the property of the taxpayer or not. If it was, we have a problem - a credibility problem if we pay it back; an insolvency one if we don't.

 

Wow. We have a credibility problem if we pay taxes when they are established to be owed?

[DETTY29]

Er, no.

 

There's a quite colossal difference between the standard spending beyond a club's natural means which absolute shedloads of clubs do throughout the UK and Europe; and taking money which is the property of the taxpayer, and using it to improve results on the pitch. The moral difference between the two is monumental - and beyond that, while the former may or may not imperil the club's position in time (it all depends on the benefactor, and the assets), the latter denies the taxp?yer money they are owed.

 

Of course, it remains to be seen if that money was the property of the taxpayer or not. If it was, we have a problem - a credibility problem if we pay it back; an insolvency one if we don't.

Neither of these events would lead to cup wins being stripped. No bungs, no sytematic performance enhancing drugs culture and no mis-registered players.

 

Again this is a big if. If the Independent Commission find Rangers guilty of not having players registered properly, but titles cannot be stripped because the SFA/SPL signed off licences without going through proper governance/checks, then the brown stuff will really hit the pan. And my hunch is this is where we could be heading.

 

Rangers fans think this is a Lawwell power trip to punish them, but covering Celtic's back at the same time due to his and Reilly's positions of power in the SPL/SFA. Just as the same accusations have previously been directed at Ogilvie, Bain and McClelland.

 

God do we really need completely independent boards/associations running our game. But then what would we get? 2 muppets in Regan/Doncaster trying to do everything to keep one of 2 clubs at the top of our game under any circumstances on one hand, then on the other trying to negotiate the stripping of awards (which clubs hold dearest of all) without going through due process.

 

For years we have had the butchers, bakers and candlestick makers running the 'diddy' clubs being blamed as being responsible for the death of Scottish football while going about their business diligently, respectfully and honestly, when all along it was the greedy ***** at the top end of the game doing the most damage.

Edited November 22, 2012 by DETTY29

[Fozzyonthefence]

I don't think sporting rules allow football clubs to break the law, Geoff.

 

If we lose the tax case, we'd have signed and paid players who helped us win trophies and considerable prize money with money which wasn't ours to begin with.

 

How difficult is this to grasp?

 

So what are you saying exactly? All clubs that have spent money that isn't theirs (basically just about every team in the SPL) should be stripped of any trophies won? Would any trophies won recently be legitimate then, except perhaps some of Celtic's?

 

Are you also saying we should be stripped of the last 2 Scottish Cups and and prize money we won because we haven't been paying the correct tax due? I don't recall Rangers getting any specific punishments for Craig Whyte failing to pay PAYE & NI so not sure I understand your argument.

Edited November 22, 2012 by Fozzyonthefence