Monthly Archives: April 2012

SFA v Rangers – Apocalypse Now?

A blog post in which I detail what Rangers were “convicted” of; what this means for them as regards liquidation and history; what the appeal process is, and why I think both Mr Whyte and Rangers would succeed, at least partially, on appeal.


Rangers faced the following charges, with outcomes noted below. All charges covered the period from 6th May 2011 to 6th March 2012.


Rule 1 –  All members shall: (b) be subject to and comply with the Articles and any statutes, regulations, directives, codes, decisions and International Match Calendar promulgated by the Board, the Professional Game Board, the Non Professional Game Board, the Judicial Panel, a Committee or sub-committee, FIFA, UEFA or the Court of Arbitration for Sport;

The Tribunal returned a verdict of Not Proven in respect of Rule 1.


Rule 2 – Each member shall procure that its officials, its Team Staff and its players act in accordance with Rule 1.

The Tribunal found Rangers FC guilty in respect of Rule 2 and imposed the maximum fine of £10,000 payable within 12 months.


Rule 14 – Full membership or associate membership may be suspended or terminated, or a fine may be issued, in any of the following circumstances:- (g) where a full member or an associate member suffers or is subject to an insolvency event.

The Tribunal found Rangers FC guilty in respect of Rule 14 and imposed the maximum fine of £50,000 payable within 12 months


Rule 66 – No recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player, referee, or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall bring the game into disrepute.

The Tribunal found Rangers FC guilty in respect of Rule 66 and imposed the maximum fine of £100,000 payable within 12 months. In addition, the Tribunal imposed a prohibition in terms of Article 94.1 and 95 of the Articles of Association, prohibiting Rangers FC for a period of 12 months from the date of determination from seeking registration with the Scottish FA of any player not currently with the club, excluding any player under the age of 18 years.


Rule 71 A recognised football body, club, official, Team Official, other member of Team Staff, player or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall, at all times, act in the best interests of Association Football and shall not act in any manner which is improper.

The Tribunal found Rangers FC guilty in respect of Rule 71 and imposed a censure.


Rule 325 Failing to pay to [Dundee United FC] on the day of the match monies due under Rule 46 c (3) and e of the Scottish FA Cup Competition Rules; being [Dundee United’s] share of receipts for the match; and by failing to pay to the Scottish FA within three days monies due under Rule 46 c (1) of the Scottish FA’s Cup Competition Rules; being the Scottish FA’s levy on admission charges for the above match.

The Tribunal found Rangers FC guilty of two breaches in respect of Rule 325 and imposed further censure. Continue reading


Filed under Administration, Football, Football Governance, Rangers, SFA

Some Thoughts re SFA v Craig Whyte – post Disciplinary Hearing

Late on Monday evening the outcome of the SFA Judicial Panel hearing into allegations against Craig Whyte and Rangers was made public. It is fair to say that the sentences passed, if not the verdicts, were surprising. The immediate response from the administrators of Rangers was to condemn the “draconian sanctions”. On the other hand, commentators and fans of teams other than Rangers expressed surprise at the severity of the penalties. There had been a widespread view that a rap on the knuckles would be delivered. However, what landed on Rangers was the equivalent of a Joe Frazier hook to the head.

I wrote in March about the charges, and predicted that Rangers and Mr Whyte would have no case to answer. I missed the target just a bit, as you will see.

The SFA released the decision which can be read in full here.

The Rules of the Judicial Panel, under which the matter was dealt, can be read here.

All charges against Rangers and Mr Whyte covered the period from 6th May 2011 to 6th March 2012. In this post I will write about Mr Whyte, and about Rangers in the next one.


Craig Whyte – Charges, Verdict & Sentences Continue reading


Filed under Administration, Football Governance

D-Day for Rangers? Preferred Bidder to be Declared? All Problems Sorted? Maybe Not

I posted this as a comment on the Rangers Tax Case Blog last night:-

“The Blue Knights are to be the preferred bidder! The world is rosy again! Let us fill Edmiston Drive and sing our sings of triumph!

That seems to be the consensus amongst internet Rangers fans just now.

Indeed plans are already afoot for a £50 million share issue. Wealthy Rangers fans will contribute £40 million and the rank and file £10 million.

The less wealthy fans are already making their plans however, to ensure that a part of them will remain in Rangers, and vice-versa.

As one of them commented:-

Holidays and nights out will be a memory after I take out a bank loan for as much as I possibly can to invest in my Club. The hope just now is utterly overwhelming.

Wait a minute! Perhaps this poster is Sir David Murray in disguise – after all, was his MO not to fund Rangers by way of ever increasing bank lending!”


Forgetting the attempts at humopur in the above comment, I wondered if the plan was near fruition.

The plan seems now to be as follows, with what I see as obstacles noted. Continue reading


Filed under Administration, Football, Insolvency Act 1986, Rangers

Rangers “Virtual” Creditors’ Meeting – What Happens Now?

The creditors’ meeting for Rangers Football Club PLC (In Administration) took place on Friday 20th April. The administrators had earlier issued their proposals to creditors (Duff and Phelps Proposal 5 April 2012), and proposed various resolutions to govern how administration should continue.

These were voted on by post, up to the deadline of noon on Friday, and the results are now awaited.

What effect, if any, will the decisions on the resolutions have for the administrators (D&P) and on the future of the Club?

I think the results of the votes, which have to be made public, will be very instructive as to how HMRC views the administration process. Opposition to the administrators might suggest that HMRC feels D&P have been too cosy with the company, for example.

It might simply be that HMRC is unimpressed by the efforts of D&P to secure a sale.

We will find out soon. But for now, what rules apply? Continue reading


Filed under Administration, HMRC v Rangers, Insolvency Act 1986, Rangers

Daily Express reports Bill Miller near Deal with the SPL – If True, This is a Travesty

Today’s Daily Express suggests that Bill Miller’s remarkable demand that the football authorities agree, in writing, that Rangers not be punished further is receiving serious consideration.

However the Express suggests that the SPL is reaching a deal with Mr Miller:-

“It all leaves Miller on his way to ownership after he and his advisors held long and detailed discussions with the SPL that appear to have resulted in an agreement of some kind that will allow the American to move forward, knowing the future will not be blighted by restrictive football punishments. SPL chief executive Neil Doncaster last night refused to comment, but it’s understood that if Miller’s plan is given the green light by the administrators he will be accorded a reasonable welcome in the Hampden corridors of power, where officials are intrigued at his proposition.” Continue reading


Filed under Administration, Football Governance, Rangers, SFA, SPL