Carloway and Graham Step Down from SFA/Rangers Tribunal – + Breaking – SFA Statement re Embargo

Michael Grant of the Herald reports today the two of the three members of the SFA Appellate Tribunal which confirmed the sanctions on Rangers before being overturned by the Court of Session have stepped down.

The article, which can be read in full here includes the following extracts:-

Lord Carloway and Craig Graham, the chairman of Spartans, will be replaced if or when the SFA’s Appellate Tribunal reconvenes to consider the transfer ban again.

Herald Sport understands that Lord Carloway was unhappy that his verdict was contradicted by another judge and wrote to the SFA to inform them he would no longer be available for any future cases. Graham cannot consider the case again because of the possibility that suspending or expelling the oldco Rangers’ SFA membership (which the newco club seeks to take over) could create a vacant league place for which his own club, Spartans, could seek to apply. Graham removed himself rather than face a conflict of interest although he will remain available to the SFA for future cases.

Only former Partick Thistle chairman Allan Cowan remains of the original panel.

I would be surprised if Lord Carloway has “taken the huff” as suggested. It may be that he has decided that the scope for speculation about fights over the port and Dunsyre Blue cheese in the Court of Session is not helpful. It could be that he did not want more of the hassle which went with his role. It could be, despite my surprise, that he is simply unhappy with the contrary decision of Lord Glennie.

In any event, the fact that he has left the panel entirely for all cases suggests that the issue covered more than simply this case.

The Spartans’ situation is odd too. According to the report Mr Graham stepped down as he faced a conflict of interest. However he must have faced one at the initial hearing, as expulsion or termination of membership would have created a vacancy in the League for which Spartans could have applied.

However the panel, the SFA nor Rangers had any issue with his presence originally.

I think we can rule out the suggestion that either man has stepped down unhappy over an SFA accord with Sevco. That is nothing to do with them, and would be a dereliction of duty on their part.

The change is potentially bad news for Rangers FC if the Appellate Tribunal does eventually sit.

If the original Panel had reconvened, then it would have been bound to a large degree by what it said before. Therefore the decision that expulsion and termination were too severe would be difficult, although not impossible, to go back on.

A new Appellate Tribunal is not so bound, and the fact that there are two new members means that it could reconsider the question of sanctions and decide that, in fact, Lord Carloway’s Tribunal were far too generous to Rangers, and that in fact expulsion or termination were entirely proportionate responses.



Posted by Paul McConville



NB – Written prior to the issue of the SFA statement tonight, as reproduced below.


I will find some time to draw up some thoughts regarding the news later on.




For some reason what is in the above bucket comes to mind on reading the statement below…

The Scottish FA can tonight clarify the position surrounding the outstanding Appellate Tribunal related to Rangers FC Oldco.

It has been agreed with Sevco Scotland Ltd that the registration embargo will be accepted as a primary condition of a transfer of membership.

It is necessary to complete the judicial process following the determination by Lord Glennie in the Court of Session that required the Independent Appellate Body to revisit available sanctions relating to Oldco, having been found guilty of bringing the game into disrepute.

The Scottish FA indicated to Sevco Scotland Ltd that they had to accept responsibility for any sanctions arising out of this case as a condition of transfer of membership.

Rather than convening the Appellate Tribunal to determine from the sanctions available to it, the company directors of Sevco Scotland Ltd have chosen to accept the 12-month registration embargo. This embargo will begin on 1st September 2012 and end on 31st August 2013.

Sevco Scotland Ltd have also undertaken to accept all other outstanding conditions relating to Oldco’s charges of bringing the game into disrepute. The conditional offer of transfer will now be submitted to the Appellate Tribunal for its consideration. This will form part of the approval process for the transfer of membership which, once approved, will enable Rangers FC to take a considerable step towards participating in Irn Bru Division Three.

In addition to the above, the Scottish FA has also received the necessary financial information requested and this is being considered as part of the application process.

Subject to the completion of all legal documentation, we anticipate transfer of membership next week.
The imposition of conditions relating to transfer of membership was made on the basis that the Scottish FA, as the governing body, has an obligation to protect the integrity of the national game and to ensure that all member clubs operate within the Articles of Association.





Filed under Charles Green, Football, Rangers, SFA

39 responses to “Carloway and Graham Step Down from SFA/Rangers Tribunal – + Breaking – SFA Statement re Embargo

  1. mick

    who will replace these two members “the fans have a right to know ”
    more goal post shifting by the sfa to suit sevco ???

  2. ecojon


    Looks as though this dripping roast is never-ending and has lots of scalps yet to claim.

  3. TheBlackKnight TBK

    Is it “WHITEWASH”? 😉

  4. duggie73

    The light original tribunal verdict, the subsequent share transfer/Div1 votes where clubs had no confidence in the authorities to pass an appropriate sentence on any of RFC’s misdemeanors and the frivolous appeal to the CoS created a situation that needed a stitch-up.
    We’re one sneaky payments ruling from closing the football authorities’ maladministration part of the story, with a reasonably fair result.
    Then it’s on to the financial investigation…

    • Disagree the admin will have to answer in a few short months and they still have to answer as individuals for the conflicts of interest and colussion with a “non footballing entity”

      • duggie73

        The leniency didn’t come from the authorities, it came from the independent tribunal.
        The authorities were left trying to invent a method to get to a fair outcome in the face of lawyers who treated the club as too big to fail.
        As messy as the process has been, that’s nearly there.
        “Nae lawyers on the pitch please.”
        Anyway, onwards and upwards.

    • JEDI

      But to me, this surely means that RFC is accepted, not SEVCO……12 or whatever the name is tonite, RFC! By this acceptance, they live they trade and they spew the venom I have lived threw my entire life.
      But can, legally, this membership go though in just a week? After all it goes back to the panel, and two of them have said ” I’m out” and so any referal must take place by a newish panel, the full case again!. Can’t be done in 5 days.
      The history does live on IMHO.

  5. The main point of interest here for me is the fact that the statement confirms “transfer” not enrollment and more specificallly the disclourse on the financial conditions, when the shit hits the fan again in a few months who is going to take the responsibility of standing up and confirming they agreed to the DD and fit and proper persons check being signed off? or is it too much to think that this will be Regans final act of brotherly love???

  6. TheBlackKnight TBK

    “Rather than convening the Appellate Tribunal to determine from the sanctions available to it, the company directors of Sevco Scotland Ltd have chosen to accept the 12-month registration embargo. This embargo will begin on 1st September 2012 and end on 31st August 2013.”

    As you may already know Paul, this ’embargo’ effectively relates only to the winter signing window. It amounts to apx 4Wk ban for actions said to be “close to match fixing”.

  7. mick

    they had no accounts and should be in junior football if all played by the rules

    • Den

      Accounts !

      Who needs accounts?

      Not the SFA.

      Just produce accounts for Companies that have gone bust owing £134m and then been fined and de-listed for not producing the last year. That will do nicely.

      Rangers and their base corruption have been and gone. I have said for a long time that they won’t come back to their former status if they survive at all.

      The biggest threat to Scottish Football is the current administration which is clearly corrupt to a degree that i would never have believed until this fiasco was played out.

      Scottish Football can survive trhe loss of Rangers and I think even prosper, it cannot survive the idiocy that is ruling it at present.

  8. mick

    there skint greens looking to sell sell sell to the highest bidder sold to the man in the tesco tie

  9. Den

    The Independent DisciplinaryTribunal did an excellent job of investigating and exposing the crimes of Rangers. Their verdict was devastating. I bet the SFA top brass were appalled at what they did.

    The major weakness was in determining the sanctions. They balked at the obvious, and available, sanctions and let Rangers off very lightly by choosing ‘off menu’ they compounded the problem by rationalising the decision.

    Anyway SEVCO have graciously agreed to accept the sanctions.

    Ac ouple of bits of the SFA clarrification statement are interesting.

    “Subject to the completion of all legal documentation, we anticipate transfer of membership next week.”

    This suggests we have a paper shuffling exercise to facilitate the transfer of membership. Not an investigation into suitability for membership.

    “the Scottish FA, as the governing body, has an obligation to protect the integrity of the national game and to ensure that all member clubs operate within the Articles of Association.”

    Sounds like a good idea – when will they start.

  10. Stuart

    Lord Carloway could be unhappy that the agreed transfer embargo is not the same as the one his tribunal imposed. That embargo began with immediate effect, not in September. Perhaps it’s not his normal practice to allow a convicted defendant to dictate which parts of the sentence he lays down are acceptable.

  11. Hold on, why is a transfer embargo being treated in any way as a penalty imposed on Rangers? Notwithstanding the good point made above about it being a compromise given the dearth of appropriate sanctions, surely the state the club/Sevco finds itself in, buying any players will be out of the question.

    And anyway, why would the 2010/11 SPL champions be in need of new players to win the FOURTH TIER league? Surely a club of that calibre has reserve players who would get a game in any team at that level?

    Or is Ally McCoist really that cr@p a manager?

    • PS Wouldn’t have a word said against Kenny McDowell – used to know him when we played in the same leagues – good fitba man, lovely guy

    • Stuart

      As several people have pointed out in other posts, there is real doubt about whether they can afford the wages of the “reserve” players like Neil Alexander that are on their books. If they can move them on then they can replace them with experienced players signed on Bosman transfers and paid SFL sized wages. They will need a core of experienced players to guide their inexperienced youngsters.

      I have a lot of respect for Ally McCoist’s abilities, but I don’t see how they will be able to afford his wages on SFL3 income either.

    • Den

      The transfer embargo is like me trading a parking fine for a 12 month ban on owning a Porsche.

      I can’t afford such a thing; or at present care to own it, but it is demonstrably a limitation.

      Wish I could chat to the judges bosses and have the rules/ laws ignored or re-interpreted as I go along. But I am not SEVCO/ Rangers and operate outside of Scottish Football.

  12. mick

    just of kds there and theres a sevco statement that the deal for embargo is not signed yet statement relised tonight by sevco on sevco media ,it highlighted the sfa were premiture in releaseing statement

  13. ADM

    Kenny McCaffrey
    July 20, 2012 at 10:20 pm

    Rangers need to sign players because their current squad (I use the word loosely) is wholly inappropriate for SFL3 – in particular, it’s much too expensive. McCulloch might accept a dramatically lower package but the rest won’t – there will be another 10 or so players offski before the end of August. So, unless Sevco intend to field the entire Rangers youth team (plus McCulloch) in SFL3, they’re going to need to sign at least a few seasoned professionals who know their way around the lower leagues – say a few seasoned SFL2 guys who can support their aim of immediate promotion but still not cost too much.

    However, suspect ecojon’s earlier posting about the Rangers assets lays out the fundamental problem – there’s no way the revenue they can generate will cover the running costs of Ibrox and Murray Park. And then, if they handle those disposals as well as they’ve handled most of their PR to date, the Bears could well desert them. Then they really would be dead, and the next incarnation of Rangers would be in the junior leagues. To be clear, I’m by no means convinced that this is a good outcome for Scottish football (or Rangers or anyone else) but I’m coming to the conclusion that that’s where we’re headed. As I posted somewhere in the last couple of days, I could believe in an interim position where Rangers is funded by a group of people whose emotional attachment to the club is greater than their emotional attachment to their (necessarily large) wealth. But people who want to burn fivers for entertainment are thin on the ground, and this would be at best an interim position, leading ultimately back to Rangers in the juniors.

    Anyone got a coherent financial plan that shows Rangers solvent for the next 3-5 years? Anyone? (No, Mr Green, your turn’s gone…)

  14. Pensionerbhoy

    “The imposition of conditions relating to transfer of membership was made on the basis that the Scottish FA, as the governing body, has an obligation to protect the integrity of the national game and to ensure that all member clubs operate within the Articles of Association.”
    This has to be the SFA’s ‘Mock the Week’ moment. Dara would say “Things you would never get at the SFA” and Frankie would spontaneously crack “INTEGRITY!” How can the Scottish FA possibly claim to be the protectors of ‘integrity’ when the ethos behind their every action with regard to the Rangers and ‘newco’ issue has been the very antithesis of this principle. My interpretation of this current statement is another accommodation of ‘newco’, definitely with the Rangers’ tag, to ensure their entry and competitiveness in SFL3. Green’s negotiation, an utterly disingenuous act in the first place, and acceptance of the embargo etc. allows him to claim the continuance of ‘oldco’ for the fans and, no matter what appears on paper, provides the clearance to play in SFL3. No matter the legal jargon, the authorities, the new club and its support will be of the mind that ‘newco’ will be a continuance of the old Rangers. I read this between the lines as clearly as the code-breakers did the Nazi messages decoded at Bletchley Park. Moreover, the signing of players embargo starts in September for a year which means ‘newco’ will be able, though constrained by limited finances, to bring in new players for the coming season and, while the embargo applies for a year, they will be restricted for less than a 9 months playing period in practice. Finally and purely for the sake of brevity and not the lack of further objections, if integrity is the basis of the SFA conditions, why have they not been open about the financial statements and other supposed submissions of Green? This apparent blind acceptance of everything that he puts in front of them has characterised the SFA’s approach to all of the Rangers/’newco situation. It has had the whiff of the underhand rather than the scent of honesty and openness all the way through. I contend and have no reason to alter my belief, that old Rangers should have been declared extinct and ‘newco’ made to apply for football league status in the same way as any other new team. If worthy, then and only then should they have been officially offered a place in SFL3. A new club, a new start and a new history. That is what I call INTEGRITY. Anything less is unadulterated football FRAUD!!!!!
    I now rest my case before I become annoyed and go to my rest, calm and at peace with the world – Things you would not hear from pensionerbhoy about the SFA :)!

    H H

    • k

      H H Pensionerbhoy

    • 100% agreed, its interesting that both SFA and SPL are now using the terms, Integrity this week when last week it was all oblivion……maybe regan and doncaster have been job hunting and found that they are …..untouchables (but not in a good way)……..anyway RFC as that is what they are to be according to SFA have stated that SFA announcement was premature and still not agreed or accepted…..well the story rolls again and again and again……………………………..

  15. Martin

    Let he that is without sin cast the first stone.

    It is plain for all to see that Rangers have heaped much trouble upon themselves, their failings are many and varied and consequently they stand stand before many and varied courts.

    What to do with Rangers?

    Well, the tax man does not do walking away, he will in his own good time liquidate Rangers and pursue every legal avenue to collect the outstanding tax.

    There may well be legal challenges in courts over ownership of company assets or financial misdeeds. Who can say for sure how that will turn out?

    There will be sporting courts that somehow have to decide what to do about Rangers. An onerous task if ever there was one.

    There is however another court. The court of public opinion. For Rangers this is the most important court of all. Until the public are satisfied that the fate of Rangers has been fairly decided, the case will never close and Rangers will never be able to start again.

    Crime and Punishment.

    When you look at it, you have to ask, do Rangers deserve execution?

    • David C MacKenzie

      The simple answer is yes. What they have done – not just in footballing terms – is serious. They cheat your creditors, maybe they act in a way that inflates the value of their shares, and they do things which, in the final analysis, damage the very community in which they live; the small businesses that they leached off of while they were scrambling, like drowned rats, to survive.

      You are a pensioner, you like to put a flutter on your local team when they play in the cup – Peterhead on January 7th 2006, perhaps – so you go down to the local William Hill and put a bet on. You know it is fun, but Rangers field improperly registered players and … wait a minute … Maybe somebody should ask William Hill what their view on this is.

      Then, again, what was that whisper that Alex Thomson mentioned in one of his blogs … they shouldn’t even have been playing last season, was it?

      There is a test that needs to be applied to see if newco has materially benefitted from the actions of oldco. Is there anything that Newco bought, that they would not have been able to buy if oldco had stuck by the books? I think it is reasonable to say that, if oldco had stuck by the books, then what the club would have looked like would have been very different. The club has been so tainted by wrongdoing that it needs to be dissolved, its history of the Murray/Whyte years, expunged from the books – not because there was certainly cheating over the whole of that time, but because there would seem to be a systemic culture of not abiding with the rules. Newco/Sevco, can then start with a clean slate. No baggage, nothing to weigh them, and Scottish Football down.

  16. Martin


    how do you dissolve history?

    • Pensionerbhoy

      I do not know Martin, especially in the hearts and minds of people and particularly fans. However, I believe the authorities would have gone a long way to satisfying the need for TOTAL justice by making public pronouncements that at least indicated this was their desired outcome. Even in the midst of the practically impossible, it is ethically possible to uphold the principle of INTEGRITY.

      H H

      • Martin


        Total justice? You have lost me there.

        I remember years ago watching my team play in a packed stadium with everyone standing on terraces. In those days cash money at the turnstile was the norm. My friends and I would later have a great laugh reading the match reports especially when it came to the official attendance.

        At times the number in the report would have had the stadium half empty when we knew it was fit to burst.

        It became a standing joke among fans.

        I wonder how the accountants sorted it all out, and if they paid tax on all the gate money.

    • Ernesider


      “History is written by the victors” (Winston Churchill)

      “History will be kind to me. I intend to write it” (ditto)

      “History is a set of lies agreed upon” (Napoleon Bonaparte)

      • Ernesider

        “You may write me down in history

        With your bitter, twisted lies,

        You may trod me in the very dirt

        But still, like dust, I’ll rise.”

        Maya Angelou (American Poet, b.1928)

        Irony guys irony

      • Ernesider

        Really like this lady (Maya again)

        Did you want to see me broken?
        Bowed head and lowered eyes?
        Shoulders falling down like teardrops.
        Weakened by my soulful cries.

  17. David C MacKenzie

    We are dealing with two different things here. One, the hears and minds of people deals with what people want to believe (memories), the other, deals with the objective facts of the case. They are recounted in narrative. There is very little that you can do with the former if people are not willing to accept facts, with the latter you say that the events in the Murray/Whyte era need to be reinterpreted to properly reflect what was going on, in this way, the narrative – as was – is expunged, or dissolved, if you like, and is rewritten to more properly reflect the facts. The current narrative tells us one thing: that the club played this many games, won this many lost that many, and in the process, won many leagues and cups. This narrative would, be replaced with a narrative account of what really went on.

  18. AndyBhoy

    Is it me or is there more significance to the chap from Spartans resiging from the panel due to potential conflict of interest not the real story. What do people inside Scottish football know about Sevco that has yet to leak out into the public domain.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s