The Rangers FC v Dundee United – Panto Season!

Mr Green proudly declared that the Rangers FC no longer owed any Scottish clubs money. This would have been resolved more quickly, he claimed, but the SFA did not pay over to the creditors the money lodged with it by Mr Green’s club. He had to get it back to settle the bills. All good!

When asked about the football debt being paid Mr Green effectively said “oh yes we have!”

Today Dundee United, with a loud cry of “oh no you haven’t” have disagreed, stating that they are still owed and have raised the matter with the SFA.

Remember Hearts being disciplined for not acting with “utmost good faith”?

Might the SFA decide this is another matter for its Judicial Panel? They might need, especially in light of Mr Green’s comments yesterday, to have a separate Chamber specifically for Rangers FC related cases!

And then the crowd can shout at Mr Green “it’s behind you!”

Posted by Aladdin McConville



Filed under Uncategorized

143 responses to “The Rangers FC v Dundee United – Panto Season!

  1. TheBlackKnight

    could it be…… (and just run with me here) that monies perhaps withheld by the SFA (as part of the “agreement”) have not yet been distributed to Dundee Utd?

    Green therefore feels the monies have been paid, albeit with monies RFC should never have been given in the first place.

    • JimBhoy

      You would think it would be a simple question to ask Green… Some qns…
      Mr Green when and how did you pay your debt to Dundee Utd FC? Maybe the cheque bounced.
      Oh and BTW you still owe Hearts half a mill, so would you like to clarify your statement about being debt free to Scotlands’ clubs..
      What are your plans to pay the other £2,5m to the other teams you owe?
      Will you pay all these fines that you purport are coming out of your own pocket or will the eejits who laughed when you made that public statement yesterday be paying? Maybe it will come out of the £20-30m you will have had in the bank since the end of july?

      • Bill Fraser

        I thought Rangers still didn’t have banking facilities. In that case they would not be able to send a cheque to anyone.

      • ecojon

        @Bill Fraser

        Maybe the SFA was a bit cagey about handling £1 million of cash from another company because with all the money-laundering stuff coming out about the banks everyone is being extra careful at the moment.

        And I think different banks have different gradings re what can be accepted to conform to money laundering regs – sure a poster said something about this a couple of weeks ago. So it could all be down to that either at Rangers’s end or the SFA’s end

    • p groom

      amount due to DU from rangers was to be paid by spl out of prize money due to rangers. green however agreed that no prize money would be paid to rangers. therefore spl do not hold any money belonging to rangers from which they could pay DU. so rangers must pay DU directly. the letters and statements can say what they like but thats the position right now. (I think)

  2. @STVAndy said the payment was made by Rangers to the SFA but “was returned by the SFA as they said they weren’t a clearing house.”

  3. iamtheperson

    And then there’s the foreign football debts:

    SK Rapid — 1011763,44
    Manchester City Football Club — 328248,71
    AS St Etienne — 252212,39
    Chelsea FC Ltd — 238345,43
    US Citta di Palermo SPA — 205513,04
    Orebro SK — 150000
    Arsenal Football Club — 136560
    FK Senica — 4783
    GAIS — TBC

    • Burnsy Bhoy

      You’d like to think these clubs would have NewCo in court kinda pronto on the basis that if they’re paying domestic debts off then surely they can pay off International debts too.

      I know £240k isn’t a MASSIVE amount to Chelski, nor £330k to MUFC, or even £137k to Arsenal but business is business, just ask Airdrie… I’m sure £30k wasn’t a great deal to Minty back in the day either!!!

      • philip spicer

        Cant Charles Green just ask those 3 billionaire investors he has lined up to lend him the money.. Funny how he has gone all quiet about them.. U dont suppose they were all a Figment of his imagination do U.. !!!!!

      • iamtheperson

        I’m no expert on Swedish football finance, but I think that at least to Örebrö £150.000 is quite a lot. Or anyway it’s half of the fee promised for Bedoya only a year ago..

  4. Davo

    And another example of the MSM reporting Green’s claims as fact, without actually verifying their validity. The succinctness of Dundee Utd’s statement indicates that they view this as panto also.

  5. C.Green

    EEEEEEEH! Bloody ‘ell, I were sure I posted t’cheques, bloody Royal mail conspiracy this is.

  6. Ernesider

    Rangers Debts To Scottish Clubs

    “And they owe more than £3.3million to other clubs in Scotland, England and Europe. Celtic are owed £40,337, Hearts £800,000, Dunfermline £88,370, Dundee United £65,981 and Caley Thistle £39,805.
    (D.R. 6th April)

    Making a grand total of £1,034,493.

    Maybe the balance is made up with EBTs

    OK. A bit snide, but until we (for the umteenth time) get some clarity etc. What can they expect?

    • iamtheperson

      That seems fine for ‘clarity’. The difference of £2,3m is the total of the foreign football debts; i.e. “England and Europe”..

      • Cregganduff


        I was referring to the post of ‘Al Bear’ regarding money owed and supposedly paid to Scottish clubs

        “We handed £500,00 to the SFA last Thursday to clear up all the fines and to pay what we owed the clubs.”
        (Al Bear)

        And I was wondering about the discrepancy between Charles Green’s half million and the total, £1,034,493, that I arrived at by adding up the sums owed to Scottish clubs as per Daily Record on the 6th April.

        But I accept that I could have made that clearer.

      • Ernesider


        Used my son in laws computer forgot to change names. It is I who added the clarification

      • iamtheperson

        Ah, right, that makes sense 😉

        The difference could be the second instalment of the fee for Lee Wallace which is not due until next year maybe?

  7. iain

    I see the BBC are tweeting that the SPL have not made contractual payments to the SFL as yet.

    As non payment of debts is such a concern of this blog I look forward to some random thoughts on the situation

    • JimBhoy

      @Iain I think the point is Mr Green’s pants are regularly on fire mate…!!!

      • Duplesis

        If what the BBC is saying is correct though, it may be the SPL who are causing the issue.

        I understood Green to say that agreement had been reached as part of the multi-partite negotiations for the transfer of SFA membership that the SPL were to pay part of RFC prize money for last season to united to cover this debt.

        If the SPL are having cash flow problems, they may be unable to arrange for this payment.

        What Green actually said (from skysports news) was:

        “From the outset, I have made it clear that I firmly believe the correct thing for the club to do is settle these football debts as a priority and we kept our word.

        “That is what we have done and substantial funds were lodged with the SFA 10 days ago to be discharged to settle the outstanding debts.

        “Furthermore, the club was given a written commitment from the SPL in May that it would settle an outstanding debt to Dundee Utd.

        “It was frustrating to be informed by the SFA several days after they received the funds that they did not wish to be a ‘clearing house’ and in fact wanted us to settle the debts directly. Arrangements were then put in place by the club.”

        It seems likely that its actually the SPL causing the bother here, since they seem to be having cash problems of their own.

    • Ernesider


      If true, I am reasonably sure Paul will have something to say on the matter.
      When were these payments due to be paid? And what was the source of the BBC information?

      • Duplesis

        Seems to be Mclaughlin tweeting this:

        The #SFL are also due to be paid by #SPL but have been told they’ll have to wait. #BBCSport @BBCchrismclaug 49 minutes ago

        #SPL cash flow problem means clubs still await vital broadcasting/sponsorship payment that was due at start of month. More soon #BBCSport

        @BBCchrismclaug 51 minutes ago

      • Ernesider

        Poor iain and his desperate mission to discover wrongdoing in others. As if this would in some strange way mitigate the sins of Rangers.

        Well here is the latest delinquency of the SPL he has alluded to. You can make up your own mind how it stacks up against the Ibrox iniquities.

        Chris McLaughlin BBC Scotland

        “The Scottish Premier League has yet to distribute cash to its member clubs and is unsure when it will be in a position to do so, BBC Scotland has learned.

        Clubs were due to receive money from sponsorship and broadcasting revenues at the start of this month but have been told they will have to wait.

        The delay is being blamed on cash flow problems resulting from the summer of uncertainty over Rangers.

        The problem is also affecting the Scottish Football League.

        It is due about £2m from the SPL for their annual settlement agreement.

        Several clubs have already contacted the SPL to find out when they can expect to receive payment, but have been told they cannot be paid until the money comes in.

        The SPL renegotiated its TV deals with Sky and ESPN after it was decided Rangers would start again in division three.

        But the league is still waiting for payment from those deals and a number of other top sponsorship contracts.

        It is understood the SPL is hoping to make a payment of some kind this month but cannot give any specific date or figure.

    • ecojon


      We don’t actually need any random thoughts as we have yours 🙂

      • ecojon

        It’s quite simple actually.

        If Rangers hadn’t gone bust then the TV money would have come in on time so it’s all their fault 🙂

    • Stu

      What do they call it in Scotland these days if you are running a commercial enterprise and you cannot pay your bills as they fall due?

      • Your called Craig Whyte, if your running such a company that can’t pay its bills as they fall. And you’d call your commercial enterprise ‘The Rangers Football Club’.

  8. JimBhoy

    Dunno about you lot but I think it is about time we heard from Bomber Brown…

  9. geddy Lee

    Bomber has pronounced.

    He was on John Craven’s News Round last night shrieking “Show us the receipts” (HIC) LOL.

    Seriously, the SPL need to come out immediately and clarify Green’s claims. If they are to blame , the last thing anyone should do is finger Green. FC Sevcovia are paranoid enough as it is without giving them excuses.

    Again, the Scottish media make total and utter fools of themselves by quoting Green and not bothering to even ask the clubs involved if they had indeed been payed.

    Will they ever learn?

    • ecojon


      Probably spent it trying to clear up the mess that Rangers have created and walked awau from.

      • iain

        Oh that’s alight then.

        Chris McLaughlin [!]8207;@BBCchrismclaug

        #SPL and #Rangers in dispute over who pays #DundeeUnited. RFC say deal in place with SPL for them to settle. SPL think deal was with oldco.

        So they withold £2,55 million, agree to pay £33k to United from it then try to welch on the debt because the “agreement was with oldco”?
        Where’s the integrity gone?

    • ParmaHamster

      A question eleven SPL clubs will be asking, not just one. Doncaster really does have a suicide wish IMO.

  10. geddy Lee

    Iain, could it be that the SPL themselves have yet to receive TV and Sponsership payments?

    After all, events this year have put a spanner in the works of Scottish football causing major decision making delays in all aspects of the game. As long as no club suffers financially because of the delay, then it is not a serious issue.

    On a side note, do you think Green has any intention of paying the Debts rangers have in the “promised land” ie Englandshire?

    We can take it for granted the “Foreign” clubs can sing for their money. After all “Rule Britannia naw that”.

    • ecojon

      @geddy Lee

      I’m sure that the bust Rangers agreement also covered all the English and Continental football debts as well 🙂

  11. iain

    STV have the wording of the agreement where SPL agreed to pay United:

    It read: “The Board of the Scottish Premier League Ltd considered the application by Dundee United that the outstanding sum due by Rangers to Dundee United of £31,031.20 be offset against the next sums due to Rangers by SPL Ltd, with the offset sum being paid to Dundee United.

    “The board decided to accede the application to Dundee United and accordingly the sum will be withheld from the next sum payable by the SPL Ltd to Rangers, and the sum will be paid by the SPL Ltd to Dundee United.”

    With the SPL now clearly insolvent, who will be the first to move for a winding up order?

    • Duplesis


      And are the SPL a “recognised football body” for the purposes of Article 94.1 of the SFA Articles of Association? It is after all bringing the game in to disprepute not to pay one’s football debts is it not?

    • p groom

      that agreement has been overtaken by events. since it was written green has agreed that no prize money for last year will be paid to rangers so spl are not holding any money due to rangers from which they could pay DU. rangers therefore have to pay DU direct. the fact that sfa paid an amount to DU directly does not mean spl should do the same. green should keep quiet pay up and be thankful sfa have saved him £30k . they might just have second thoughts…….

  12. geddy Lee

    iain, the deal was with the OLD CO, not FC Sevcovia. I believe this is the SPL’s position.

    Have you noticed the 5 stars disappearing off your jersey? yet not a peep out of the club, or of course
    the monkey media. Even Sandazzler was wearing a star free shirt outside Ibrox yesterday, as he entertained the gullable
    with his hilarious predictions.

    Sevcovia knows that if they don’t announce their new status, the media and “Ra People” won’t ask about it.

    • iain

      I know the stars cause a real amount of angst for so many here, so I’m happy to confirm the stars are still there. They have been moved from the ECWC tribute strip for the season. You will be happy to learn they will be resplendant above the badge as usual on the away strips.

      “iain, the deal was with the OLD CO, not FC Sevcovia. I believe this is the SPL’s position.”

      And I’m sure you will agree that this position is contemptable.

    • Duplesis


      why would it matter if the deal was with the oldco? The SPL still haven’t paid it, and had agreed to do so. Oldco was in administration when the deal was agreed, and is still in administration now – so what’s the excuse for non-payment?

    • Duplesis


      I would agree that STV’s source is likely Green or at least RFC, but the SPL themselves appear to acknowledge the existence of this deal, albeit they claim that it related to the oldco.

      The oldco does still exist, and its status hasn’t changed since the deal was agreed. It appears that money was withheld from oldco by the SPL on the basis these debts were being paid from the sums withheld, and that hasn’t been done.

      My tongue in cheek post about the SPL bringing the game into disrepute aside, the real point as it seems to me is that Green’s claim that the SPL agreed to pay is , on the face of it, true.

      Ultimately if the SPL’s argument is that the money is no longer to be paid, as oldco is heading for liquidation, then I’d imagine the SPL may face action from BDO as and when they start their work.

      The oldco was due money from the SPL, but seems to have agreed that was to be retained by the SPL to pay some of the football debts, including the £30k odd left to pay United. I don’t see how the SPL can both refuse to pay the oldco and fail to pay the debts agreed from these sums.

      Together with the failure to pay the SFL, it does seem the SPL company is in some financial difficulty just now – albeit a difficulty which will no doubt be resolved once the Sky money comes in.

      • ecojon


        Obviously the question of whether SPL has any dosh is a separate one and actually a more serious one than the £30K. I am amazed that SPL obviously have been unable to arrange banking facilities to cover the period until the TV money arrives.

        Of course the question is also raised are they trading whilst insolvent?

        Does the SPL now collapse and pitchfork us into an immediate ad-hoc league reconstruction. I wonder if Rangers would still want to stay in the new bottom layer if that was the case?

  13. geddy Lee

    Duplesis, no question this debt should be paid, but I don’t see what it’s got to do with FC Sevcovia.

    If everything we have heard from Green is true, and that’s a very big IF, then once again, the SPL head honchos will have been shown to be unfit for purpose.

    This debt is from rangers fc, who are still in existence and are just waiting for the liquidators to finally put them out of their misery.

    I fail to see how Green can just have selected debts transfered to the new club, while leaving others behind, and then have the sheer audacity to try and claim a clean bill of health.

    Remarkable state of affairs

    • iain

      “I fail to see how Green can just have selected debts transfered to the new club, while leaving others behind”

      I would presume he “selected” the Scottish football debts which weren’t covered by a letter from the SPL (or anyone else for that matter) stating they would be paid from witheld prize money to carry over to newco. And “left behind” those which were.

  14. iain

    I’m sure the SPL secretery Iain Blair will move swiftly to have the following taken from the STV website if it is factually wrong:

    The letter, from SPL secretary Iain Blair, read: “The Board of the Scottish Premier League Ltd considered the application by Dundee United that the outstanding sum due by Rangers to Dundee United of £31,031.20 be offset against the next sums due to Rangers by SPL Ltd, with the offset sum being paid to Dundee United.

    “The board decided to accede the application to Dundee United and accordingly the sum will be withheld from the next sum payable by the SPL Ltd to Rangers, and the sum will be paid by the SPL Ltd to Dundee United.”

  15. Does anyone know the exact wording of the condition given by the SFA for SevGers’ licence – ie, the paying of all footballing debts?

    I would imagine that any responsible national football organisation, particularly one whose reputation has been so badly affected as the SFA’s, would ensure that the ‘paying of footballing debts’ included not just those within the debts owed to other SFA members – especially given the SFA’s own membership of the greater Uefa organisation.

    Even so, how can Green have us believe that a £500,000 payment covers everything, when even just taking Scottish fitba debts this is patently not enough?

    This brings us to the reporting. I am prepared to allow that some journalists may now be just reporting what is said, and leave it to readers and those directly involved to comment – a tried and trusted way of giving a story ‘legs’ as others involved take issue with the statement behind the original story. (I know from personal experience that editors love this – journalists should just report, not give their opinion.)

    This seems to be what is happening now with what is now coming out of Ibrox: we get Green’s bluster about the payment he (?) has made with regards footballing debts, closely followed by a rebuttal from Tannadice (and maybe more to follow?).

    Given that Green doesn’t seem to be able to keep his mouth shut these days – and, as Paul’s previous post shows (if nothing else) that SDM’s ego can’t stop him making self-serving statements – then it maybe that the media may finally help us uncovering the truth after all. Give ’em enough rope, I say.

    • ecojon

      @Kenny McCaffrey

      News journalists should not give ‘opinions’. They are there to report the facts but that does not mean parrot a PR handout. It means read that handout and ask pertinent searching questions and then report the answers or failure to answer. That is reporting the facts with no opinion expressed as should be the case. It is up to the reader to form an opinion based on all the facts available.

      • Ecojon, of course – and that’s exactly what I believe is beginning to happen (didn’t I day that? Sorry if it wasn’t clear). And obviously, it is a sad indictment of the standards of journalism at leading Scottish media outlets in recent years that we even discuss such a basic journalistic rule.

        I have said before that one huge contributing factor to this is the history and culture of sports reporting at newspapers such as the Daily Record (of course, not just them, but goddness knows they have been bloody awful in this respect). We all know that’s no excuse, but I cannot really see another Traynor or Keevins being employed in the future (journalism degrees etc are required now, and candidates will have had at least some basic grounding in reporting financial matters, not to mention ethics).

        Indeed, it could be said that in this respect Sir David Murray may have one lasting effect on standards of Scottish journalism: I doubt any future ‘proper journo’ is going to be easily fobbed/bought off by megalomaniac owners of national institutions who decide to embark on damaging and costly ego trips…. (well, OK, fingers crossed)

      • ecojon

        @Kenny McCaffrey

        Most news journalists have little respect for sports journalists which in Scotland tends to be exclusively football journalists. They have been writing sh*te for years and a steadily declining band of readers hang on every word and every word is usually proven to have been keich. People even get upset and dial phone-ins and it’s all a joke.

        It’s all manufactured angst and I can’t remember the last good football exclusive because football journalists are no longer in personal contact with top players who are multi-millionaite status. So the journnos take the PR line from the agents who are always try to stir things one way or the other to make money from their ‘stable’ or queer the pitch for another agent.

        Btw journalism degrees are the worst thing that has happened to the industry. You can’t train people to be good journalists – you can’t put fire in their belly, that has got to be there to start with.

        In the old days trainee journalists would do their shorthand and typing and learn law as applied to journalism at night school and if they were really lucky and had a nespaper contact then they would work as copy boys in a newspaper.

        But at the end of the day some of the best journalists can’t type, can’t do shorthand and are pretty hazy on the legal details. They weren’t typists after all 🙂 What the good ones are are people who can sniff a story at a 100 yards. They find their own stories. Todays journos mainly couldn’t find a story in a million years. They sit in the office looking through the internet, checking wire copy and waiting to be handed a story.

        I said something the other day which I will repeat in answer to your comment: “I doubt any future ‘proper journo’ is going to be easily fobbed/bought off by megalomaniac owners of national institutions who decide to embark on damaging and costly ego trips”.

        Kenny, think about the economic climate these new journos with no contracts or maybe if really really lucky a six month one after a while. They will do just about anything to hang onto their step onto the ladder. They ain’t even in the union which is going down the pan rapidly. And they don’t actually want to be there – they want 2 years of ‘experience’ and then it’s off to PR, marketing or more and more these days to teach degree journalism courses and they’ve even got PhDs in journalism now. I’ve seen people in their mid 30s coming out with first class Hons and Phds in journalism and they can’t even get a shift at a paper.

        And they are way too old these days – the owners want kids who will do exactly as they are told. The great thing about middle and upper-class kids is you take them on a six month contreact and milk them dry for stories about their family and friends and neighbours and when they dry-up get rid of them and start again.

        And in among all this you get the odd one that actually not only has what it takess but needs the adrenaline buzz of a great exclusive to feel alive but they are getting fewer and don’t get the support that used to be there with genuine specialised writers. Oh specialists are still there but they know nothing about their subjects.

        It used to be all about on the job training from people who knew their job and human nature inside out – not now.

        Hope I am not depressing you but I reckon the SPL is in better shape than Scottish journalism 🙂

  16. iain

    Rangers statement:

    RANGERS Football club has today released the following statement.

    Rangers Chief Executive Charles Green said: “As previously stated, Rangers Football Club can confirm it has paid all outstanding debts to Scottish football clubs, in addition to agreeing to waive all claims to unpaid fees accrued last season, as part of the Five Party Agreement which was a condition of SFA membership.

    “A letter from the SPL to the Club – dated 18 May 2012 – stated ‘The Board decided to accede to the application of Dundee Utd and accordingly, the sum will be withheld from the next sum payable by the SPL Limited to Rangers and the sum will be paid by the SPL Limited to Dundee Utd.’

    “Why the SPL have not paid Dundee Utd the outstanding sum as previously agreed is a question that they need to answer.

    “We wrote to Dundee Utd on Monday explaining the SPL had previously confirmed they would pay it.

    “I spoke to Stewart Regan and his solicitor this morning and provided them with copies of all relevant documentation.”

    I’m sure our host will have picked it apart by tomorrow and assured us the agreement is null and void and the SPL are totaly correct not to pay it.

    But for now…there is is.

    • ecojon


      I will say again who was the letter addressed to. I see the club is mentioned in the guts of the letter but was it addressed to the club or to a Ltd company. It does raise an interesting point if it was sent to ‘Rangers Football Club’ as opposed to a Ltd Coy and that is – does rangers FC have a separate bank account from the Ltd Companies which have recently been operating?

  17. charlie o hare

    reading from the Rangers statement…… ‘The Board decided to accede to the application of Dundee Utd and accordingly, the sum will be withheld from the next sum payable by the SPL Limited to Rangers and the sum will be paid by the SPL Limited to Dundee Utd.’

    BUT then rangers,to get their hands on oldco’s membership agree to this….Rangers Chief Executive Charles Green said: “As previously stated, Rangers Football Club can confirm it has paid all outstanding debts to Scottish football clubs, in addition to agreeing to waive all claims to unpaid fees accrued last season, as part of the Five Party Agreement which was a condition of SFA membership

    if the SPL WAS going to pay out of any future payment due to oldco, then THE rangers agreeing to waive ALL claims to unpaid fees puts the debt back onto THE Rangers

  18. Andy


    You can’t have it both ways – In Scots Law if the letter written as has been quoted then it constitues a contract….Remember, how the side letters on EBT’s are contractual!! It doesnt matter if it is with oldco or newco, the SPL have failed to agree to it to the agreement they wrote!!

    The letter has been provided to Stewart Regan and his solicitors, so we shall wait and see what the SFA say on this.

    The SPL again complete lack of corporate governance becomes evident , and the shambles continues…the news also being reported that they are somewhat short of funds, despite the fact that Rangers did not pursue any further the £2.55m due.

    I am pleased to see that Dundee Utd have decided to make this affair public in order that all can see for themselves the shambles that is the Spl. Why are they not paying clubs funds they are due? They have written a letter saying they will? Rangers are not liquidated yet if that’s the card they are planning to play, but why do that to the disadvantage of one of their own members, why not uphold the agreement? We have left them the money in good faith that they will pay Dundee Utd, it is not our problem if they don’t, as a new company there is no liability that legally exists with us now!!

    Instead of berating Rangers, surely ALL the questions should be asked of the SPL and why they are hindering their own members??

    PS: Amazing that on here TRFC are being shed in a dark light for trying repay football debts, The Jelavic payment is not due until the end of August – WHY ON EARTH WOULD WE PAY IT EARLY!!

    • ecojon


      I think Dundee Utd just want their dosh. I don’t quite understand how you have ‘left them’ the money. Whose money? You were stripped of the SPL ‘bonus’ so that was never your money and after that date so you couldn’t give it to anyone.

      • Andy


        Then they should have simply called someone at the spl, no?? Funny they should decide to release a statement, not normaly how such things are conducted…

        Perhaps sfl will serve a winding up order to spl if payment is delayed much longer, as sfl of course has a duty to protect its own member clubs position and if they are threatend by spl’s refusal to uphold contractual agreements then what choice will they have but to pursue the funds via legal means??

        Its funny, spending too much on players via ebts etc is what brought rangers down….and yet now the spl spending money they dont have on investigating those very cases has helped lead to their own insolvent position….its no wonder doncaster was franticaly trying to keep rangers in spl!!

      • @ ecojon

        Here we go again.
        At what stage have Rangers old or new been advised of a punishment that would strip them of their earnings in the SPL last season?
        Everything which has been published to date states that Rangers agreed to the money being withheld in return for transfer of the original membership of the SFA.
        As in the TV rights of my previous posts it seems that if Rangers had not agreed the threat was that the membership would not be transferred.
        The agreement for the SPL to pay DU pre dates the arrangement in July by some 9 or 10 weeks.
        Why were they not paid in this period.
        Could it be that the SPL could not afford even that small sum never mind what was properly due to Rangers in whatever version be it for paying creditors or whatever.
        In any event you cannot just tear up an agreement afterwards to cover ineptitude or worse.
        Doncaster was not desperate to keep Rangers in the SPL – he was anxious to avoid paying what is due to whichever version of Rangers.
        It would be entirely possible to believe that the episode has been inflated to divert people away from the problems at the SPL and further to hope that they could get past the liquidation of Rangers oldco to avoid paying out any money from the share due to oldco or on their behalf.
        It seems to me that an independant enquiry or Judicial Commitee needs to be set up to investigate the actions of the keepers of the rules and to establish whether there were any other motivations to their actions.
        There is a prima facea case for investigation at the highest level of the SPL including directors from member clubs and the SFA.
        Worse the stench of sporting integrity has turned into something which might just suggest any recovery ( as we hoped for on posts elsewhere ) is really beyond us now and is actually that of decaying teeth as they are being gnashed.

      • ecojon


        I think what spurred Dundee could quite simply be they were raging when they saw Green’s statement that he had paid all Scottish debts and yet they didn’t have their money.

        I have been pretty busy workwise today so not totally up to speed – but did Dundee know about any agreement and if so who did they think was paying the money?

        I also wouldn’t jump to the letter being contractual and I really think we would need to see the complete agreement reached and on what basis it was signed by the signatories and I think the only problem there will be with Green – who was he representing if he signed the agreement? That is a really important question and I don’t think we know the answer to it.

        I don’t really see what the SFA is meant to do because surely the agreement should at least be clear on who is paying a specified amount of money to whom. So I don’t really see that the SFA are involved and if there is now cofusion about the meaning of the contract then either all the parties to the agreement sit sit down sharpish and hammer out and understanding or it will end in a court case where I believe uncertainty tends to be held against whoever was responsible for constructing the wording.

        I do think you have got it wrong by sayiing the SPL should pay the money to Dundee Utd regardkless whether this is legally correct or not just because Dundee is an SPL member. Two wrongs don’t make a right I’m afraid.

        And again you say you ‘have left the money’ – you had no money to leave and presumable Green agreed to it not being handed over because he was obviously told that if he pushed for the cash then Rangers wouldn’t be playing football. So it was Hobson’s choice but it is always the same I’m afraid – when you’re down the kicks come in.

        I also am still unclear as to whether Rangers has paid any football debts from its own funds or whether they have been paid from the money that Rangers had to forfeit as a ‘fine’ to be allowed to remain in Scottish Football. If it is the ‘fine’ money then Rangers haven’t actually cleared the football debts but that may be a red herring as I saw someone else say that the ‘fine’ money was going to be split between SPL members.

    • Good Point.
      From what I have read it seems Rangers membership of the SFA would not be transferred to the newco until they walked away from the £2.55m due to oldco.
      Oldco are in administration not in liquidation and have creditors to pay. Hopefully BDO will pursue this and recover the funds which have been hijacked.
      The agreement between the parties was confirmed in writing by Mr Blair in May. Why has the money not been paid over three months later?
      It seems they don’t like that agreement now and want to take the £2.55m but Rangers still need to pay the debt! Ludicrous!
      The suggestion now seems to be that the SPL will pay the debt and recoup from Rangers future earnings when or if they return to the SPL.
      The SPL was insolvent according to last year’s ( 2011) accounts and is clearly being mismanaged if they cannot balance the books.
      As the directors signed off the accounts on a going concern basis they should be taken to task on the fiscal situation.
      Also this money to be paid to the clubs relates to last season and presumably the sponsors have already paid up for this.
      If the SPL are depending on this season’s money to pay last year’s earnings to clubs should there not be alarm bells ringing.
      Doncaster, Regan and Lunny are not fit for purpose.
      If this is the situation of the finances at present what economy measures will they take to trade solvently. Perhaps it is time for the SPL to live within its means?
      How ironic!!

      • ecojon


        This really is looking serious and if the TV money isn’t injected immediately and paid out to all teams then I can see suppliers and banks all over Scotland putting the grilles up on everyone.

        Things could grind to a total halt in liquidity terms very quickly – obviously depends on individual club finances but let’s say Celtic could run for a month (Being optimistic) the teams they are playing against might not last a week and then the cash flow dries up for Celtic as well.

        I hope it is sheer incompetence rather than the cupboard is bare – the incompetency we can deal with but no money could mean collapse of large bits of the structure.

        Mr Green might think he has won a watch but it’ll be a Mickey Mouse one because the game could be a bogey and even Indonesian and Singaporean investors wouldn’t p*ss on a Scottish football share issue.

        And for all the Bears who were wishing for SPL collapse well you know what they say about being careful.

        I wonder if all this is why the Rangers Men weren’t flinging money into Rangers because they knew the whole game was on sand foundations but Green being an outsider didn’t and couldn’t believe his luck at picking up £120 million in assets for £5.5 million.

  19. ecojon

    We are all floundering about here and we don’t even know the actual contractual parties involved never mind the complete wording of the agreement.

    It is impossible to know at this point in time whether the SPL should have paid Dundee Utd or whether Rangers – whatever that means, whether it be the club or a slew of other Ltd Coy names, should have paid them.

    Once we know who is at fault then blame or finger pointing can be apportioned.

    And I will say again who was the letter actually addressed to by the SPL – that is critical. It could be Blue Pitch Holdings, Zeus Capital or anyone. We just don’t know. Possibly even a mystery shareholder and then we’ll never know 🙂

    • p groom

      doesnt matter who the letter was addressed to. contents quite clearly indicated that payment to DU would be made on behalf of rangers. but…. after green agreed that rangers would not receive any prize money for last season, clearly the agreement was no longer enforceable. there is no rangers prize money now so from what money are spl expected to pay DU?

      • Duplesis

        @p groom

        It’s an interesting argument, but I would wonder if Green and his representatives would have been daft enough to have fallen into that sort of trap. The agreement surely would have been to waive the balance of any unpaid fees after the United matter (and any other agreed matter) was dealt with.

        It doesn’t seem to be the argument being made by the SPL in any event. According to the BBC, they are saying that the agreement is void because it was with the oldco.

        I’d have to say that I don’t understand that position – apart from anything else there doesn’t seem to have actually been an agreement with oldco – the SPL appear to have agreed to a request by united that this deduction be imposed on the oldco on the basis that oldco had defaulted in a payment due to United. (I’m assuming under rule C9.1)

        From the SPL letter there is no suggestion the oldco had to, or did, agree to that deduction, so the reference to the oldco/newco distinction now by the SPL seems a bit disingenuous.

      • ecojon

        @p groom

        Of course it matters who the letter was addressed. The contents indicated that it was payable to Rangers – I agree with that. But what is Rangers? And what is the actual date of the agreement as Rangers have meant different things in terms of different companies in recent times. I am not trying to annoy Rangers fans with this, it is just a fact of life.

        So to go back to something I said in an earlier post: If the letter is simply addressed to Rangers Football Club is that a separate legal entity that can accept the money or is it even entitled to it? I don’t know the answer to that. I do know that we have a situation where the fans see Rangers as a continuing let’s say ‘institution’ but I don’t believe it has a bank account nor any kind of trading account.

        I have never seen any mention of anything in D&Ps reports that point to it being financially ‘active’.

        We also have the problem of Green’s statement (oh yes yet another one) where he says something about it doesn’t matter if it’s company A or company B in charge as everyone knows it’s Rangers at Ibrox. But that doesn’t shed any light on the matter.

        The agreement date is important because if Green was involved in the agreement what hat was he wearing. Was it as a rep for D&P, or for Rangers or for one of his limited companies. We just don’t know.

        But I can’t believe that the SPL doesn’t believe it has a strong case for what it is doing/has done. If it was just an oversight then they surely could have just put their hands up when Dundee Utd complained, said sorry and paid the money over.

        If they are in a hole and are refusing to do the correct thing then it is a resignation issue and no doubt about it but whether Blair of Top Man I don’t know.

        Of course if it’s just because they don’t have £30k then Scottish Football is well and truly f**ked.

      • Andy


        You are very quock jump on and conspire about the poor state of rangers finances and ten the allegdly nonpayment debts we have paid, when evidently ee have paid everything owed up to date. Du were sent a letter on monday informing them that funds would be settled as agreed by the spl, so they knew wot the situaion was and lets say they didnt receive the letter then why not be an adult and phone charles green and ask him, he would have given them the same answer. Having said that i am pleased to see the spl being shown up like this.

        If you want dispute the technicalities of who the letter was made out to then fine and if that is the ‘integrity’ with which spl wants to live upto then shame on them for ever playing the ‘integrity’ card with us!!! How dare they act in such a manner, its written in black and white that they agreed to pay the 30k, the fact they havent done so shows them up to have zero integrity and a complete sham of an organisation thats cindictive and underhanded moves such as this only incite further resentment in the game. I accept a lot of my clubs wrong doing and take it on the chin, admit to those wrongs And would like them put right, but i will not accept us being dragged through the mud or made out to be the party in the wrong when we are clearly not!!

        The sfa rather quickly need to take control of the full scottish game and disband the insolvent spl immediately and incorporate some of the common sense that has been thrown about by the sfl.

      • ecojon

        @p groom

        OK I follow your reasoning – but why just not tell Dundee Utd they’re onto nothing so go and see Rangers? Is it sheer incompetency or can they really not scrape up £30K?

  20. K19

    Well who paid Hearts the £300k they are reported to have received? And the next time Hearts are late paying wages because of cashflow problems, I hope the SPL remember they were late paying the TV money due to erm cashflow problems!

  21. Robert

    This raises the interesting point of who Rangers SPL prize money for the 2011/2012 season actually  belongs to.

    It is my view that as all fixtures for the season the prize money that would have gone to Rangers was not forfeited. The SPL prize money being 11% for finishing second plus the 4% that all SPL teams get.

    In England, in the event of a football club suffering an insolvency event the Football Creditor Rule (FCR) results in prize money held by the football authorities being used to clear footballing debts.

    It should be noted that HMCR have unsuccessfully challenged the FCR in the High Court see

    Thus, provided an equivalent of the FCR applies in Scotland, I would have expected Rangers football debts to be paid off, to the extent of the money available, with the remainder, if any, going to the Rangers oldco.

    In the event of an equivalent of the FCR not existing in Scotland, I would not expect Rangers SPL prize to be just divided out between the remaining SPL clubs in proportion to the prize money they were due to receive. If this is the case, then I would expect HMRC to challenge this, as they will expect the prize money to go to the Rangers oldco in the absence of an FCR equivalent.

    However, while I see no justificaton for the Rangers newco getting any of the SPL prize money for last season, I can not see any justification for the SPL just dividing the SPL prize money out between the existing SPL clubs.

    • @robert and @ ecojon

      Both responses make very good points.
      Robert I agree totally that the prize money no matter what agreements have been extricated should be used to repay creditors of oldco.
      Ecojon your point on liquidity I also agree with although I suspect that thanks to the man wae the bunnet the finances at Celtic are probably on a secure footing able to withstand some more pain than you suggest. However teams like DU, Hibs and Kilmarnock are already struggling and perhaps the problem is more widespread than this.
      The SPL clearly has major issues to address and the overall viability of that organisation needs to be looked at.
      If they are trading whilst insolvent which seems to be the case then the baw is well and truly burst.
      The agreement made in May between Rangers and the SPL should have been sufficient for DU to get their money.
      To wait until the next agreement some 10 weeks later before revisiting the original needs some explanation.
      It only seems a short while ago since someone asked the question ” do you think this is a diddy league?”
      The answer is now history.

      • ecojon


        Five-way agreement? Were the parties the SFA, SPL, SFL, D&P and Rangers?

        If it is we need to know the exact legal position of Rangers (was it the club, was it Green and if so in what capacity – was it as Rangers CEO, for one of his Ltd Companies, in a personal capacity or whatever) and we also need to know who was signing for D&P – was it Green? or one of the administrators.

        Until we have the answers toi these questions we can all guess anything but the legal status of the signatories and whose prize money it was is important. The way things have been happening there’s probably a rule somewhere about what should be done. I accept that there needs to be an explanation as to why the time gap has arisen.

        But all credibility has now gone in the SPL leadership and it really is hard to see how it can survive this fiasco.

    • ecojon


      I seem to remember someone saying that the law in England & Wales was different to Scotland in these circumstances but I can’t remember which way 🙂

      Personally I think the money should just go into the creditors pot for distribution although the way D&P act it would probably not get there anyway,

      In this case Rangers wouldn’t get a penny either way as all their footballing debts come to more than £2.5 million. If you follow your argument through you would be claiming that Rangers should get the £2 million still to be paid for Jelavic wheras I would say that should go to the oldco IA and again be distributed to ordianry creditors. Why should football creditors take precedence over the corner shop?

      I agree that the SPL shouldn’t be sharing the money out as it should go to the creditors and I’m not really happy about it being made a condition of being allowed to play football. If you want to fine Rangers as a punishment well that’s another ball game but this was is so close to blackmail and tawdry with no principled position involved.

  22. iain

    The SPL clubs are stealing £2.5 million from the creditors of Oldco Rangers.
    And all in the name of integrity!


    • ecojon


      Read the Scotsman piece which shows that Green is at it – what was the date on that letter again he was ranting about – was it before the agreement he made on 27 July I wonder. God talk about skating on thin ice 🙂

  23. ecojon

    @How much did Rangers steal from the creditors including the tax man what was it £120 million – grow-up and stop clutching at straws as you now sound childish.

    We are looking at the collapse of the SPL and all that worries you is Rangers and proving they were lilywhite. In a worst case scenario there could be a football meltdown in Scotland and you just want to clear Rangers’ name. Well that’s impossible so don’t waste your time trying.

    • iain

      Those are the facts.
      Its nothing to do with making Rangers “lilly white” Or clearing Rangers’ name.

      It;s about the morality of holding onto £2.5 million pounds that should be going to creditors.
      That would be story enough…but for a body to do so and divvy it up amungst themselves after months of spouting complete nonsense about so-called “sporting integrity” is outrageous.
      It shows the SPL chairmen up as complete and utter hypocrites.
      I’m sorry if that makes you uncomfortable. But they are th facts

      • ecojon


        You fall into the same tunnel-vision trap of thinking this is all about Rangers and they are all that matters. I know it’s difficult to change the habits of a lifetime but please try it WILL make you feel better.

        I said where I thought the money should go but I did point out that there may be a rule in the book which covers the siruation. So let me suggest that instead of foaming-off at the mouth that you take on the very constructive tasks of goinfg through the SFA and SPL rule books and bring us back a report on what you find.

        I actually thought it was fans that fought for Sporting Integrity and the people you now attack were the ones trying to assist Rangers. Funny how quickly you turn on erstwhile frioends and investors like DM – he must bitterly regret all the money he threw into Ayebrokes.

        Why should I be in the least bit ‘uncomfortable’ because you believe you have shown up SPL chairmen as complete and utter hypocrites. Please retain your ‘sorrow’ for your fellow Bears for what is coming at Ayebrokes – it will be needed.

        The best advice I can give you is try and look at the bigger picture – get outside that square and even think outside the circle and it’s amazing the things you might begin to see if you work at it. You obviously have a long way toi go but be an optimist – it really is the best way 🙂

        And remember football is just a game and in the bigger picture of life it means absolutely hee-haw and if you don’t see that your future prognosis looks quite bleak and almost as poor as that of your club.

    • Andy


      The end of the spl would no bad thing, they have been shown up to have no moral integrity and would appeR to be in a financial mess, they simply can no longer be trusted to run the top league in the country…and as u alluded to rarlier if they were using the 2.5m as blackmail leverage in a deal
      Then heads should roll!!

      The survival of the clubs is what is important…is there going to be enough money on receipt of sky money to cover all of the spls liabities? If not who makes up the difference, the member clubs? Celtic alone as the only club capable of coping with the loss for th greater good, now that wld be a sight? Or do they withold from sfl and wait for the court battle they cant afford? As a company with insolvent accounts they have no chance of obtaining the banking facilities to cover any shortfall……or do they stop paying the little guys mr whyte style, in actual fact this is probably already happening, invoices will simply not be getting paid…

      Time for sfa to show leadership and fix this, we can only hope they have he will, vision and money to do so or clubs may have literally voted for their own death, which whilst possible i didnt actually expect to happen…..sporting integrity is beyond purchase….welll it turns out the fans arent willing to pay for it so time for chairman to pay for their vote to save their clubs!!

      I do not wish to paste rangers previous misdemeanours but i do object to any wrongful accusations and the fact that rangers has been the only show in town when there are evidently far bigger issues affecting the full game in this country!!

      • ecojon


        Well Green said rangers will be a stronger club financially than Celtic and you’ve got all these Billionaires coming on board so I think it’s down to you to save the League – not quite as good as the World but not too shabby either 🙂

        Stop generalising – it’s obvious we have taught you little in your time
        here, Specify what ‘Wrongful accusations’ you mean or your remark will be ignored.

        Far bigger issues – I didn’t know about them but Mr Green obviously did and I suspect the media in the shape of STV has been manipulated – now who can have done that I wonder?

        You really have to calm down and stop making all these wild accusations without a shred of evidence. Do what other posters do – get the accounts and go through them and then produce a balanced argument based on at least some fact and not hot air. Then you might be taken seriously.

  24. Robert


    The laws of Scotland and England are different as are the football rules and regulations. Someone who has closely examined the Scottish football rules and regulations would need to advise if there is an equivalent to the English Football Creditor Rule (FCR).

    However, the Scottish laws plus football rules and regulations as they are written may have meant that the SPL prize money would go to the Rangers newco (perhaps Paul could explain this?).

    If this is the case I am surprised that the Rangers newco had to give up any right to the £2.55 million SPL prize money in order to achieve SFA membership. It is as you “so close to blackmail and tawdry with no principled position involved”.

    Knowing how HMRC have challenged the FCR in England, I suspect they will be closely examining the SPLs rights to retain the Rangers prize money and divide it out between the SPL members rather than pass it to the Rangers oldco so it can go to the creditors.

  25. ecojon

    Looks as though Charlie Barras Bhoy has been on the snake-oil again and either has slippery words or has lapsed into speaking in French again or possibly tongues.

    Scotsman claims apparently on 27 July that: “Green agreed to take on the club’s football debts, which stood at more than £3 million, and waive any claim to the prize money for the club’s 2011-12 campaign.”

    And here we are a fortnight later with Green dragging out an old letter which predates the 27 July agreement – oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practise speaking French.


    Green said on Monday that all outstanding money owed to Scottish clubs had been paid. He added: “Furthermore, the club was given a written commitment from the SPL in May that it would settle an outstanding debt to Dundee Utd.”

    United were listed as being owed £65,981 when Green submitted his doomed Company Voluntary Arrangement proposal, but more than half of that sum has been paid. It is believed Rangers were told in a letter on 18 May that the £31,000 would be withheld from the next sum payable by the SPL to the club, following an application by United.

    However, Rangers were consigned to liquidation the following month and Green’s company bought their assets and business before his application to join the SPL was rejected. A five-way agreement was reached on 27 July for Green’s company to assume Rangers’ SFA membership following protracted talks.

    This was signed off by the SFA, SPL, Scottish Football League, Green and the original Rangers company, which remains in administration ahead of their liquidation. Green agreed to take on the club’s football debts, which stood at more than £3 million, and waive any claim to the prize money for the club’s 2011-12 campaign.

    Rangers finished second in their final season in SPL and would have been entitled to 15 per cent of the income, which would have been about £2.5m. But while Green feels the £31,000 should come out of that sum, the SPL believes the five-way agreement superseded any previous deal made with Rangers’ administrators. The SFA could be called in to arbitrate on the matter as United await their payment.

    • ecojon

      Just checked the date of the letter that some numpty at Ibrox fed to STV – they will be looking stupid tomorrow – that’s STV I’m talking about.

      They swallowed a letter dated 18th May as proof that Rangers were in the right and then on 27 July Green agreed to pay all the football debts and waive any claim to the prize money for the club’s 2011-12 campaign.

      Not even a trace of blackmail or coercion there and it’s funny how Green talks tough to his adoring fans in Ibrox car park but seems to cave-in when actually dealing with businessmen.

      The problem that Green has fallen into is this creation of the seamless Rangers how did the banner read? Before, Now, Forever or was it Past, Present, Future. Whatever 🙂

      I still wonder if he signed the 5-way agreement representing D&P and if he has then I reckon BDO will want to know why he was signing away oldco rights – they’ll probably reclaim the £2.5 million off him even though he didn’t get it. Life’s a bitch and then one morning you wake-up talking French.

      • Greg72

        I wonder whether I can shine a lttle light on this matter? Mind you, I’m not sure if I can, but here goes:-

        If (and it may be a big ‘if’) the SPL owes monies to oldco (i.e. the company now in administration) and oldco owes monies to DU (or anyone else for that matter), then if the SPL were to deduct anything from sums due to oldco and pay the deducted amount to DU (or whoever), my understanding is that such a move would not be ‘on’. In other words, the SPL would have to pay the WHOLE amount due to oldco to that company (or its Administrators or Liquidators).

        My only caveat would be if the Administrators had sold to newco any debt due to oldco by the SPL then newco would be able to make any arrangements it wanted to with the SPL.

        In common with most folk, I’ve no real idea what may or may not be due by the SPL to oldco. However, if there is anything due (or was due at the date of Administration) I supect this will be on BDO’s list of things to investigate!

      • ecojon


        I see what you say but I think it is possibly answered by the Scotsman who state that at the 5-way meeting on 27 July: “Green agreed to take on the club’s football debts, which stood at more than £3 million, and waive any claim to the prize money for the club’s 2011-12 campaign”.

        Now I am not normally into conspiracy theories but I can see a scenario whereby Green giving the money to the SFA for disbursement could also have caught them in the web which may have been spun in total innocence.

        With the SFA refusing to become involved a major plank in the ‘agenda’ theory failed and all that Ibrox had left in their locker was an out-of-date letter to an agreement that had naturally lapsed when changing legal circumstances overtook it by the signing of the 5-way agreement on 27 July.

        If the SFA had taken the money from Green and distributed it then it wouldn’t have been a tawdry leak to STV – it would have been your full Bhoona succulent lamb with all the Media in attendance at Ayebrokes.

        All in all a nice move but doomed to failure when the SFA didn’t make the anticipated moves laid-out in the opposition game plan.

        Circumstances, my dear Bhoy! Circumstances 🙂

      • @ ecojon

        Surely the agreement of 27/7 is based on the situation after the May agreement and assumes that all actions in the May agreement have been dealt with.
        As the actions of the May agreement were not dealt with and the SPL have not revealed this at the time of the newco negotiation for SFA membership then the responsibilty for paying DU must lie with the SPL.
        The May agreement was not superceded by the July one according to all reports published so far which seem to be the position of the SPL.
        It simply dealt with yet more conditions ( or blackmail if you like ) from the SPL to allow newco membership.
        At the date in May the prize money would have been due to oldco and would be an asset. Green purchased the assets and would therefore become the owner of the balance of the prize money that was left after settling the debts in line with the May agreement.
        If there is a balance remaining that should got oldco to settle creditors.
        The SPL and clubs participating in the hyena like gorging of the carcass of Rangers are way out of line morally and most probably legally.
        I look forward to BDO and HMRC standing said delinquents up in court in the name of sporting integrity and for the good of scottish fitba.

  26. I am unsure if, in the deal to pay Dundee United from “the next payment due to Rangers” meant the payment of Rangers’ prize money for finishing 2nd in the SPL last season.

    If that was the case, Duff & Phelps were negligent in a primary duty to collect (or attempt to collect) all monies due to Rangers oldco and put these in the Creditor’s Pot for distribution pro-rata.

    In that event, D&P should have blocked payment or any deal to make payment of 100% to one Creditor.

    • ecojon


      The important missing piece of the jigsaw was whether Green was representing or a proxy for D&P at the 5-way meeting. If he was then it isn’t up to the SFA, SPL or SFL to query what he agrees to as that’s between Green and D&P.

      Even if Green was acting on D&Ps instructions and either knowingly or mistakenly went ultra vires then that too is a matter between Green and D&P.

      I tend to think the £2.5 million should have gone into the creditors pot for distribution using my logical non-football brain but when I look at the way D&P have spent money then to he honest the footballing side of the brain says it would be better off given to football clubs to spend than D&P.

      And, as I have mentioned before, there could well be a rule or even predcedent covering the situation and there, is of course, the law of the land and how it views the matter.

      As always, these things are not straightforward and not helped when someone feeds an out of date letter to the media purporting to show the ‘facts’ when those ‘facts’ were radically changed months later and this was known to the same players.

      I don’t know if Green or someone acting on his behalf ‘conned’ STV into thinking they had an exclusive but it’s nice to see that like Rangers nothing changes and the ‘succulent lamb’ feast continues.

      STV walked into it by ignoring a first principle of journalism – Why does someone leak a story? The correct answer might even lead you to think the ‘leaker’ is morally reprehensible or possibly in it purely for financial gain.

      In a sense the ‘answer’ isn’t material but as long as it’s the correct one it helps make sure you ain’t blindsided IMHO.

      • iain

        Several times ecojon refers to “leaked” ;”conned”;”tawdry leak”. He started out by demanding the source of the reports on the agreement to pay United, then finishes by stating STV “ignred the first rule of journalism” my not questioning te motivation of the leak (which hardly needs much thought on the motivation anyway)…..All the while happily reffering to the Scotsmans version.
        Not once does he wonder the souce of their informion, wonder why it was leaked to them or indeed if this represents an example of the pittifully cliched “succulent lamb” journalism.

        In essence…due to what they are reporting his thoughts are:

        STV : Bad (mainly because he doesn’t like what they have reported)
        Scotsman : Good (mainly because their leaked information pleases him.

        What are the odds?

      • ecojon


        your rant is a gross misrepresentation of what I have said but that’s par for the course.

        Btw you have mistaken me with Ally – he’s the guy that demands transparency and then the people involved end-up with death threats from thugs and bigits.. And it turns out that Ally knew who they were all along a bit like Green waving a clearly non-event letter about.

        FYI I have referred to the Scotsman, DR, STV and I think the BBC not just the Scotsman. I look at a wide variety of media reports including the DM and DT on the basis that you should always keep in touch with what the class enemies are thinking and up to.

        Your statements on the ‘source’ is so wrong it is pitiful. I reckon I know exactly who the source is and I also know with a great deal of certainty why that source leaked the letter. However everyhting comes out in the wash at the end of the day.

        You are so caught-up with simplistic statements it’s unreal. STV Bad: Scotsman; Good.

        In general terms Scotsman news reporting is better than that of STV on every subject not just Rangers. That is mainly because of the differences in the medium (not of the seance variety in case you are confused) and the time scales involved. STV were obviously pushed to get the item on air at lunchtime as they had an exclusive and wanted to run it.

        I happen to think they were conned. Won’t be the first time and won’t be the last and it’s something that every journalist can fall prey to. But you do learn.

        Which is soemthing you singularly don’t seem to be able to do iain. Just the same old blue-tinted tripe being pushed out with its bitter agenda. You really must be hurting but don’t worry, it can and will get worse – or so my source at Ibrox tells me 🙂

    • ecojon


      I should have said I think the letter did mean it would be paid from the 2nd place money for last season but the letter fell by the wayside when the agreement of 27 July was signed.

      I’m not even sure whether the letter ‘agreement’ was written or verbal or indeed an agreement with anyone other than the SPL and Dundee Utd. As I was at pains to try and point out last night we were all, myself included, pontificating without knowing any of the actual facts of the matter.

  27. ecojon

    Act II of the Ayebrokes Panto has opened with a bang. Now appears that the wicked witch had asked the SFA to pay Scottish Football debts from the £800k it is allegedly holding from the Davis transfer to Southampton.

    I am going to take this as read for the moment because if we look at the musical chairs and shell games surrounding that matter we’ll all get dizzy.

    So Green asks the SFA who smelling some kind of rat say: ‘Oh no we won’t’ to the Ibrox choir’s: ‘Oh yes you will’.

    Bottom line is SFA stood firm and Green had to fund the debt repayment to the Scottish clubs from as yet undisclosed sources. It is not known at this point whether the media had been tipped-off that the debt had been cleared when in fact it hadn’t.

    Green then went looking for the Davis money back – leaving me wondering why did he leave a supposed £800k kicking about with the SFA when he could have had it in his own company accounts and if nothing else earning money?

    However back to the comedy. When Green asks the SFA to return his money the gaffers who sign the big cheques were all on holiday and the biggest cheque they could sign was to cover Aggie’s tea & coffee fund. Always suspected Scottish Football was run on a shoestring. Most be why all the football bosses are always in Lawwell’s office as it’s the only one wi choccy biccies 🙂

    As a member of the audience in the cheap seats I can’t help but wonder why Green wanted to the SFA to make the debt payments, albeit with his money, and I mention a post which might point the way.

    hughmcvey August 16, 2012 at 3:53 am:

    It raises a pertinent question in whether if Green paid Scottish Footballing debt did he legally become liable for all the debts? I then wonder whether keeping the supposed £800k off the Ibrox books meant that it became much more difficult to trace and attach by a football creditor down south or abroad who might beieve a legal precedent had been set.

    The curtain hasn’t even fallen on Act II yet so we have a long way to go on this litlle vignette – that’s from the French Barras Bhoy. It might help you in your Grand Master French Defence 🙂

    • Andy


      Since it seems to be your way or the highway on here, my question to you is:

      From the SPL original letter, in May, do you not beleive that they should have acted with the integrity of a well appointed governing body and settled the debt well before now? Regardless of what, who, when, the actual words they wrote in the letter stated that they would pay DU these funds….And they are now trying to use legal loopholes to dodge their original agreement, whilst one of their member clubs is scraping for survival and needs EVERY penny they can get. – This could end up costing more in legal fees than the actual debt!!

      Since we have all been banging on about how important morals and integrity are in the game, should our governing bodies not at least live by their own sentiments..Regardless of what was agreed in 27th July, it is, obviously a significant misjudgement by Mr Green that he would have expected the SPL to already have paid these monies to DU, given that they clearly agreed to, more than 2 months earlier.

      I would literally go to the bank today and lift the £30k and hand to DU myself if it weren’t for my anger at how the SPL have conducted themselves!! Then again I probably wouldn’t be allowed to pay the money to DU out of my own money… The amount of money is so small that for the SPL to hang around after agreeing to settle is somewhat mind boggling, I assume whilst insolvent they still have some money in the bank….

      With regards to SFA, perhaps Mr Green beleived that as the SFA had withheld the 800k due to Rangers having unpaid Scottish Football debts, that they may wish to administer the payment to ensure that the funds were distributed as appropriate…..It would seem odd to go to the lengths they have to ensure Rangers didn’t get the money because of outstanding football debts, only to then hand it back or not as the saga continues….Besides who on earth uses bloody cheques these days…are the SFA that behind times that they cannot have their directors authorise payments electronically…

      • Andy

        PS: If you want some figures from accounts SPL has an insovlent balance sheet with just under £200k deficit assets to liabilities.

        They were signed off on a going concern basis (a year test basicly to see if a company can trade)..based on and this is a quote from their accounts:

        is of the opinion that the existence of contracted income will allow the company to meet its liabilities as they fall due for the foreseeable future

        Well it seems that commentary is been somewhat misguided…and now they try and dodge financial agreements they have made, despite having a £2.5m liabilty being cut from their creditors.

    • iain

      And another “good leak” reported without critical analysis from eco! And this time the recipient of the leak is chief lamb eater as well!

      I wonder if Mr Traynor also failed the first rule of journalism and wondered the motivation of the leaker?

      Still the SFA do seem happy to be a clearing house sometimes….maybe only when they can have the best part of a million quid sitting in their accounts gaining interest.

      • philip spicer

        The Reason the SFA have 800K is because Southampton were Instructed by the English FA not to pay the Transfer Fee to Newco Rangers but deposit it with the SFA until the Legality of the TUPE case was worked out..

      • ecojon


        Critical analysis can only be conducted when at least some of the facts are known. My gut feeling yesterday was that the letter although possibly not of the Zinoviev one was certainly ‘dodgy’. That is why I was very interested in who the letter was addressed to as it seemed obvious to me that it was vital to establish the parties to this May agreement.

        If you have any questions for Mr Traynor please put them to him direct as I do not speak for him and certainly do not know what goes through his mind.

        I have no idea if the SFA clearing house comment is just another one of your fatuous throwaway remarks but as per normal I will ignore it as it advances the debate not one iota. But then you have no actual interest in debate just in advancing your own narrow views methinks.

        However as I often say: They shall be judged by their words and that includes en Francais 🙂

        I have written a fairly lengthy series of answers to Andy which was well underway prior to you cheap and as usual misplaced jibe about lack of ‘critical analysis’. Andy, since coming here, has actually started to develop debating and cogent reasoning skills whereas you remain a ‘troll’ and I fear that you always will. What a sad existance never to progress beyond the level of the gutter 🙂

  28. ecojon


    Let me try and answer you points and I genuinely haven’t a clue what you are on about with the: It’s your way or the Highway’. This isn’t my Blog and if anyone walks away that’s down to Paul whose Blog it is. But he keeps a fairly liberal open-door policy for people to commentg and write guest posts and as far as I know guest dubmissions are judged on merit but just ask Paul if there are any criteria and I’m sure he will keep you on the right track.

    OK let’s attend to your questions:

    Q1)do you not beleive that they should have acted with the integrity of a well appointed governing body.
    A1) I believe all governing bodies should act with integrity at all times and it is actually quite insulting to be asked that as a question and proves to me that you have either not fully read or understood my posts or just pick bits out of them.

    Q2) settled the debt well before now? Regardless of what, who, when, the actual words they wrote in the letter stated that they would pay DU these funds.
    A2) In view of the absolute fever pitch meetings, discussions, threats to life of people acting on behalf of the SFA/SPL and a million other things all to do with Rangers and then the time spent on all the ‘normal’ things involving the other clubs many of which were dependent on what was going to eventually happen such as TV money, relegation/promotion I would say that paying £30k to any club might have slipped off the radar and it would be wrong if that happened. I can only assume it wasn’t a make or break amount of money for Dundee Utd or they would have raised the matter much sooner.

    The other problems is of course that matters have moved on legally on various fronts not least that Green entered into a new agreement on 27 July which the SPL believes negates the May agreement (which may be an agreement between the SPL and Dundee Utd only). Why did Green sign the 27 July agreement when he obviously put reliance on the May ‘agreement’ involving Dundee Utd. Surely any savvy businessman who have incorporated that into the 27 July agreement or was he trying to be fly and keeping quiet hoping the SPL didn’t notice – I don’t know nor understand the workings of Mr Green’s mind especially when he talks French so you would need to address that question to him – I hope you get more transparenct from him than anyone else has.

    Q3).And they are now trying to use legal loopholes to dodge their original agreement,
    A3) It is the SPL’s legal duty to act with integrity and not pay a debt which it is not legally liable for as this would affect its member teams either in terms of service provided or cash payable to them.

    Q4) whilst one of their member clubs is scraping for survival and needs EVERY penny they can get
    A4) I think there is more than one club counting every penny and as I have mentioned it is hard to believe that £30k would bring Dundee Utd down or else they would have been banging on the SPL/SFA doors long before this.

    I also think your concern for the SPL is a bit disingenuous when the bulk of your travelling support proudly proclaim they are out to financially smash the SPL. As part of their campaign they ain’t going to travel to SPL clubs sees as the enemy which is the vast majority and the are cancelling their Sky subscriptions. Hatred is a terrible thing especially when it causes them to destroy something they actually need like a top-flight league with healthy clubs or does Rangers want an league with poor teams so im poverished that they can’t buy decent players so that Rangers win all the trophies?

    Q5) This could end up costing more in legal fees than the actual debt
    A5) It may well do so Mr Green would do well to take legal advice and to abide by it. The SPL cannot and will not pay thye money because they believe it would not be legal for them to do so. So the ball is really in Mr Green’s court if the SFA adjudicate in the SPL favour.

    Q6) Since we have all been banging on about how important morals and integrity are in the game, should our governing bodies not at least live by their own sentiments
    A6) No they should operate within the rule of law and their rule books as well as the within the spirit of the rule books – their sentiments either individually or collectively as a Board should not be what determines decisions for obvious reasons.

    Q7)Regardless of what was agreed in 27th July, it is, obviously a significant misjudgement by Mr Green that he would have expected the SPL to already have paid these monies to DU, given that they clearly agreed to, more than 2 months earlier
    A7) That is a question for Mr Green as I don’t know why he was so remiss when signing the 27 July agreement which IMHO is not the action of a competent businessman. I also am unable to accept ‘they clearly agreed to’ as all we have seen is one letter which is anything but clear. Is there an actual agreement and who are parties to the May agreement?

    Q8)I would literally go to the bank today and lift the £30k and hand to DU myself if it weren’t for my anger at how the SPL have conducted themselves!!
    Q8) Let me give you a bit of advice and I have been involved in running businesses for a large chunk of my life in various forms. Never make a business decision when you are angry – always sleep on it. I realise you have recentlu started in business and I would advise you to hire professional advisors and take their advice because if you start handing out £30k to strangers then you will be bust even before Rangers.

    Q9) Then again I probably wouldn’t be allowed to pay the money to DU out of my own money…
    A9) I can think of no legal bar to that if that is what you wish to do although I wouldn’t tell any of your fellow supporters as you really could end up in Blue Heaven.

    Q10)The amount of money is so small that for the SPL to hang around after agreeing to settle is somewhat mind boggling,
    A10) I think I have already dealt with the agreed to settle argument but as to the amount it is obviously not small to Green or he would have paid it or raised it and clarified the issue on 27 July. As regards the SPL the amount is not the issue it is the legal liability and I have already explained my position on that.

    Q11) I assume whilst insolvent they still have some money in the bank….
    A11) Insolvent is a legal and technical term and from the argument put forward by the SPL the issue has nothing to do with whether they are solvent or not. However yoyur fellow supporters have, as I have already pointed out, the avowed aim of destroying the SPL financially.

    Q12)With regards to SFA, perhaps Mr Green beleived that as the SFA had withheld the 800k due to Rangers having unpaid Scottish Football debts, that they may wish to administer the payment to ensure that the funds were distributed as appropriate…..It would seem odd to go to the lengths they have to ensure Rangers didn’t get the money because of outstanding football debts, only to then hand it back or not as the saga continues…
    A12) I have actually no idea what Mr Green believes even when he dreams in French. However, this topic is possibly even more complex that the main one under discussion with even less transparency so I have no real intention of becoing involved in pointless ‘whataboutery’ when we haven’t a clue about the facts of the matter.

    Q13) .Besides who on earth uses bloody cheques these days…are the SFA that behind times that they cannot have their directors authorise payments electronically…
    A13) I have no idea the transfer method employed or who within the SPL is authorised to transfer cash amounts. But what really puzzles me is why a businessman would put a supposed £800k into another business to pay debts that the original business was due to pay to third parties. Now that is bizarre and I struggle to understand what is going on in that process. Obviously the SFA struggled as well and wouldn’t touch it with a barge pole – possibly to retain their integrity.

    SECOND POST – I have ignored most of it as it appears to be more of a rant than anything else.

    Q1)Well it seems that commentary is been somewhat misguided…and now they try and dodge financial agreements they have made, despite having a £2.5m liabilty being cut from their creditors.
    A1) Like you I have no idea of the SPL’s current trading position but accept the caveat that the last accounts were signed-off on which in the current economic climate seems to be becoming the norm.

    I have tried to answer the points you have raised Andy – if you repeat them back to me I won’t bother next time. You have to keep moving forward in life and there is no point in always looking back.

    There was some kind of agreement back in May between parties although we can’t be certain who and we don’t know the detail. This appears to have been superceded by a written agreement between 5 identified parties on 27 July – although I am still unclear whether Mr Green was wearing two hats viz Sevco and D&P. Mr Green appears not to have raised the earlier May agreement on 27 July but now claims that the 27 July agreement he was party to did not alter the May agreement.

    Unless he changes his mind or the SFA rules in his favour it’s one for the lawyers and the courts and that will most definitely cost Mr GTreen more than £30k in legal fees.

    So the question for you and other Bears Andy is why is Green doing this – what financial advantage does he hope to gain?

  29. iain

    “So the question for you and other Bears Andy is why is Green doing this – what financial advantage does he hope to gain?”

    I suggest he’s doing it because he believes it’s the right thing to do.

    The SPL agreed to pay the £30k then appropriated a massive £2.5 million and subsequently rfused to give over the £30k!

    I’m willing to bet that would annoy most people.
    Sometimes it is about the principle.

    I will take a leaf out of your own book eco and ignore most of the other biased, narrow minded “inside the square” arrogant and supersillious nonsense you post

    • ecojon


      Oh dearie me – touched a raw nerve have I? You always know that a) you have won the argument and b) your opponent knows this when they turn to hurling insults. 🙂

      • iain

        On the other hand…I always know when I have won the argumnt when the other bloke starts claiming to have won the argument!

        P.S. for insults check out some of your responces to me above.

        This place has been a closed shop for so long people dont even notice them any more

      • Andy


        Our views are simply too far apart and your so blinded by your dislike for Green and Rangers that you have given up on seeing that not all others live by a life of morals and integrity, and instead try and turn every article in here into an anti-Green or Rangers post.

        I have enjoyed this site for the past few months, however your one sideded witterings of everything you write have grown tiresome. It is fairly clear for all to see that the SPL in this case have acted improperly with respect to common decency, yet you seem to beleive this is part of some Mr Green conspiracy….

        Whilst I am not offended by what you say, your constant attacks on my club, some just, some unjust, are no longer worth the effort it takes to type a reply. Most people who write on here tend to be able to give a balanced view, this appears simply beyond you, which is of course your right and I do not disrespect your point of view in anyway, it is just one that clearly isn’t conducive to a balanced arguement on any subject involving Rangers. Therefore I will avoid commenting on your posts, if you would kindly offer the same respect in return.


      • ecojon


        I will continue to comment on your posts if I see the need to draw attention to faulty logic in them. So keep off the emotion and open your eyes to all sides of a debate and things will be fine.

        I thought you would withdraw, like your troll colleague, because it was a fair bet you wouldn’t be able to actually debate my arguments in a non-emotive way and actually advance a rational counter-argument.

        But listen to my advice – don’t hand out 30k to strangers for no good reason or your new business just won’t last.

      • Andy


        You tell me that I should not let my emotions rule my thought process, however, the emotion that drives your debates on here is your dislike of Rangers and Green, and whilst you may source your information well to provide ‘back-up’ to your arguement it so one sided that you have given little or no thought to an alterior scenario and when anyone challenges that, you nit pick holes….On here I am simply relaying my opinion and interpretation of as much of the facts I beleive we have in front of us, and providing my own view – If you beleive it is moral and correct way to operate by writing a letter telling someone you will pay a debt due then silently choosing not too, then that is your opinion, and you can write all you like about the law on here, but that good sir is simply in the land of common decency, simply wrong.

        The £30k comment was simply to highlight the fact that it was a small amount of money, and that it is simply wrong to agree to settlement of this and then renege on the agreement, which is how the SPL have acted, and now for such a small balance are trying to drag the name of Rangers and Green through the mud with it….Simply put, morally they have acted deceitfully and cannot be trusted. I have no wish for any SPL club to suffer, however they well given the state of those in charge of them. And I obviously had no intention of drawing 30k out of my account and giving it to a DU, my point was to emphasise that me, mr joe bloggs public and many others could solve this if they wanted, however why should anyone as it’s up to SPL to act with integrity by honouring their original agreement. Which I am sure is Mr Greens stance.

        And on that note, I’m out.

      • ecojon


        I have absolutely no personal dislike for Green – if you think I am displaying personal dislike you can’t have been spending time on Rangers sites with the things that are said on them about him

        When he was having to flit from safe house to safe house it was to keep on the run from Rangers supporters not Celtic supporters.

        SPL are not necessarily in the business of acting morally and many Celtic supporters believe they didn’t over many aspects of the Rangers case. The SPL are charged with adhering to their rule book and not taking illegal action. Their position is that it would be illegal to pay Dundee Utd under the May agreement. At the end of the day I don’t know if that is the case or not. What I do know is that if a court rules that they are correct then I too would accept that but I doubt that that would be the case with your typical Rangers supporter.

        As to you paying the money to Dundee Utd I can but quote what you said: “I would literally go to the bank today and lift the £30k and hand to DU myself if it weren’t for my anger at how the SPL have conducted themselves!! Then again I probably wouldn’t be allowed to pay the money to DU out of my own money.” I counselled against any such rash moves which was a genuine move on my part as I thought you meant it as you clearly stated that £30k wasn’t much money – let me tell you it’s a helluva lot for me.

        However, when next you return I will extend my normal warm welcome 🙂

  30. Duplesis

    I don’t think that the Scotsman article actually tells us very much more than we knew already. The RFC statement issued yesterday afternoon confirmed that the letter from the SPL acceding to United’s request to withhold payment of prize money was dated 18th May.

    Ecojon’s point about the parties involved in any agreement is a good one, although I think the point is better directed to the parties dealing with the agreement in July (and who was wearing what hat at that meeting), than to which organisation received the letter from the SPL.

    The SPL letter of May doesn’t seem to me to represent an agreement between the SPL and any corporate body representing RFC. Rather it is giving notice to RFC that a decision has been taken to hold back part of RFC’s prize money to pay United, following on an application from United. For that reason I don’t think the body to which the letter was addressed is that relevant, this isn’t something to which any incarnation of RFC had to agree – it was something being forced upon them or at least decided upon in their absence.

    Where the issue of the bodies involved may be relevant though is at the July meeting. Who were the Green group representing at that meeting? newco, oldco, both?

    The reason why I ask is that I find it difficult to see how any party acting on behalf of oldco could lawfully agree to waive sums due to oldco, and thus deny the creditors an increase in the money available. I can’t see how that would not be challengeable as a gratuitous alienation. That would apply whether the agreement was reached by D&P on behalf of oldco or by Green on behalf of oldco.

    Against that background, I’m wondering what it was which was actually waived at the July meeting. The only which makes sense to me would be newco waiving any rights it may have to the prize money, since that would not be prejudicing the oldco’s creditors. Of course, in all likelihood newco had no rights to the prize money in the first place, so in this scenario Green is probably waiving nothing at all. (The only way I can see newco acquiring rights to the oldco’s prize money is if they were part of what was paid for in the purchase price, but that doesn’t seem to be the case.)

    If all that was waived was newco’s right to make any claim on the prize money, then that shouldn’t affect the SPL’s obligation to pay United.

    If however in some way Green and his representatives acquired the rights to the prize money – or at least to negotiate it away – then it would be an amazingly inept performance for them to do that without taking account of the payment to United. Not impossible, but really quite astoundingly bad.

    If the oldco’s rights have indeed been waived then this appears not to be some lawful retention to pay football debts or fines contained within the SPL/SFA rules, but to be a windfall extracted from RFC (or rather the oldco’s creditors) by the SPL for the benefit of the remaining SPL clubs. That does seem to me to be quite wrong.

    If it is an unlawful gratuitous alienation then of course the recipients are in the frame to pay it back if the liquidators choose to pursue this issue.

    • ecojon


      My gut reaction yesterday was that the money belonged to the oldco creditors and that is still the case.

      But there is still more to come on this I reckon which might help explain things in more depth. But why is a guy up to his knees in discussions with Billionaires about major funding of the club wasting time and energy over £30k.

      It’s the type of thing in a multi-million £ business that a fairly junior manager can deal with or you just send a solicitor’s letter. Or you just raise it in a business like fashion with the SPL and sort it out.

      What is to be gained by going public other than to frighten possible AIM investors who might form the impression that the whole of Scottish football is a financial basket case and/or that Rangers’ name and money problems are becoming synonymous.

  31. charliedon


    Unfortunately, I’ve been too busy the last couple of days to contribute to this latest debate and I’m only now catching up a bit loosely.
    You have to remember that this is a forum about Scots law and much of the debate will therefore be of a technical nature and that is where ecojon and others are coming from.
    Andy, I’m sorry you feel you don’t want to continue because although I don’t always agree with you, you have raised some valid points and tried to support your arguments.
    You have to expect that much of the posting will be anti Rangers because the basic subject of the debate is about Rangers’ wrongdoings. Whatever anyone thinks about the rights and wrongs of EBTs, side letters and contracts etc, what is a straightforward fact is that Rangers, and Rangers alone, created this whole mess for Scottish football by getting into massive debt through maladministration and ending up in administration leading to liquidation. The bizarre administration of Duff & Phelps only exacerbated the problems. The resulting mess is complex. But it is also a straightforward fact that Charles Green has provided no clarity whatsoever about his company’s shareholdings, backers etc, not even to the loyal supporters of the club he purports to own. In the eyes of most reasonable persons, that means there must be something he doesn’t want you to know. Why? That is what most people on this blog will be trying to figure.
    I am not anti Rangers. But I certainly am anti EBTs, legal ones or otherwise, where very highly paid people seek to avoid paying their equal share of tax leaving it to ordinary working folk to carry the burden.
    I hope therefore see can see this debate in that light and continue to contribute until maybe one day all will become clear.
    As for you iain, your contributions have mainly been to promote the Rangers cause with little sensible argument and instead simply insult people. For me, you can withdraw your contribution any time you like.

    • charliedon

      Correction to penultimate para of last post – “I hope thefore you can see this debate in that light…..”

    • ecojon


      very well put and much better than I could manage

    • Andy


      Thankyou for your words. I completely accept that Rangers have caused the mess, but I do beleive that with proper corporate governance, i.e. someone enforcing the rules of the game, then the whole debacle could have been cleared up and avoided sooner, though I do admit that David Murray may have had too much influence over the game as a whole and any attempts by the SPL could potentially have been swept under the carpet (not that I am suggesting that happend).

      And I do also accept that 90%+ of the views on here will come from celtic supporters, I am not against all opinions that are a dig or go at Rangers, however, when so obviously we and DU are the ones that are suffering materially or reputationaly due to either, negligence or moral corruption at the SPL, then I do it find it frustrating that such lengths are taken to assume Rangers and/or Green are the cause of all problems…

      I along with most Rangers fans have cautiously welcomed Charles Green, as that is our only choice if we want to go and watch football. I am still very wary and acutely aware that he is expecting a multi million pound pay off when he leaves, be it in a month or 10 years. He is to say the least a bit rough around the edges and at times I do watch through cracked fingers when he conducts some interviews – othertimes he actualy comes across okay. However, he is largely irrelevant, as he is just a figurehead with little real power, his initial investors, Zeus & Co will have mandated him to secure others and Mike Ashley to all extents is a pretty decent start. When he has completed this mandate then I think he will go, who is left behind is what is important, and if it is more people in the same mould of Mike Ashley then the club will be in good shape, albeit it will take far longer to challenge Celtic again. I would, however, be suprised to see an open share issue this year…He has just go the fans to buy season tickets, if he wants us to buy 50% of the shares going he should perhaps wait until some of those with perhaps not the same means as others to save a litte….Unfortunately, Companies House is often not the most up to date source and it could be next year before actual shareholdings are disclosed, but in the meantime I will as I said, cautiuosly give him the benefit of the doubt and time to conduct, which I am sure are highly private negotiations with potential investors, with the hope that he will then disclose this information once complete..

  32. charliedon


    I think much of what you’re saying is fair enough by me. You’re stuck with Green and will just have to hope he comes through for you, but as I said, until he comes clean about his set up I have to firmly remain lined up with the doubters.
    I forgot to mention in my last post that I largely agree with you about the SFA/SPL and their shananigans throughout the whole fiasco. You make a valid point. They’re coming out of it with little credit and I don’t have a great deal of trust in them either.
    However, my observation is that the SFA/SPL have ended up tangling themselves in knots through initially trying to HELP Rangers. It seems clear that they were trying to manoeuvre Rangers straight back into the SPL, and when that strategy fell apart, at the very least into SFL1. Now that Rangers are firmly ensconced in div 3 their attitude may well have changed. Rangers may not so be of so much value to them, at least for a while.
    In a somewhat perverse way, I also agree with the view, also expressed by Walter Smith, that the SFA are not free of critism for standing by and allowing the Rangers situation to deteriorate to the shambles it became.
    But, and it is a VERY, VERY BIG BUT indeed – can you imagine the outcry from Rangers fans and the mainstream media if the SFA had stepped in and put a spoke in the wheel during David Murray’s trophy-laden era? It’s fearful to think about. Similarly, the same clamour would have arisen if the SFA had stepped in to prevent “billionaire Craig Whyte, with wealth off the radar” from rescuing the stricken club. Imagine the screams of “Celtic bias in the SFA” etc in either of these scenarios.
    Finally, many of us strongly suspect (and I offer no direct evidence at this time) that there has always been a strong Rangers influence within the SFA. Therefore, I think it is devious in the extreme for Rangers people to attempt to shift the blame for their debacle to the SFA.

  33. mick

    @any1 thats sevco if you want to save face go and watch your local team greens just the same as murray and whyte ,be offline myself lately buts thats me back near the desktop ,Murray and the handshake killed rangers and ogilvie the sfa main man had an ebt why has the rfc forums and msm not wanting him to do a interview on it ,the ebts is just the tip of the iceberg lets not forget the ebts is still to reveal faces and names ,also souness got a ebt after a deal when manager of other club, theres still lots of twists and turns to come ,the more we embrass online mass media the more we will discover ,the sfa and rfc have a lot still to answer a few articles on msm saying it was ok will not make it go away ,and over the last 2weeks a have watched green slagging people about uniforms that to me is sick and evil and a now hate this man and wish him all the bad luck in the world ,reasoning being is most people in glasgow struggle to make ends meet and also there is perants commit suicide trying to cope with the presure of it any1 celtic or rangers working class knows what its like school uniforms is a serious issue and for a man like him to come out in the media is sick sinister and down right evil charles green a hate you more than thatcher ,this ressesion were in is brought to us via men like green and murray and whyte .sevco will go to the wall and “our kids will flourish both celtic and rangers” and all the kids that were the butt of his jokes about uniforms will hate him to.the samaritians should have slated him as well and politicians ,when you start jokes about children and uniforms you deserve cancer for that

    • Andy


      I was at a funeral today for a work collegue that had just lost their husband to cancer…to wish that upon anyone is absolutely disgraceul, you shame your club and this country!! Vile comment

      • mick

        Andy a lost my dad to cancer last year ,Am not a shame to my country am defending my countrys under class the butt of greens jokes a mean what a say ,when you mention economics and mention kids school uniforms and the economics around it thats what a think you deserve ,am not bitter or vile ,the man has made ajoke about school uniforms its not something you do in the most deprived areas of scotland were perants are worried about stuff for school ,why did he not say dont spend your money if your kids need shoes hes a sick man simple as that

      • ecojon


        Sorry to hear about your dad mick and also your workmate Andy. Just got told at tea-time that one of my old mate’s died today. So I’ll be hoisting a few pints to him on Monday and thinking about the happy times.

        You definitely won’t catch me on here on Monday that’s for sure because as I keep saying – Football is only a game and life is much much more important every minute of the day that’s for sure.

    • iain

      FFS! 🙂

      That’s a quality rant!

      Green’s sick and evil for jokimg about what some clown said on a phone in as an excuse for a low crowd at Sellick Park?

      I really have heard it all now.

      The fact that five people (I’m assuming you “thumbed up” yourself a couple of times) thinky your hyperbolic kiddy on offended nonsense says it all about the people who frequesnt the board and it’s level of “debate”.

      • mick

        @iain the comment was made by a man on the radio took out of context and made a joke of by green its a matter of respect ,All classes use this site am 3dimentional being from the east end iain ,the clown on the radio said he bought a school uniform and green blow it away and made a joke out of it and the orcs played along with him hes evil and sick

      • mick

        @ecojon soz to hear about your m8 ,live first soccer second its the only way

      • ecojon


        You state: says it all about the people who frequesnt the board and it’s level of “debate” in a pejorative sense.

        I’m amazed that you are still here then – you must be at the same level of the rest of us 🙂

        As to ‘thumbing-up’ you must know a way of doing it more than once so now I wonder if your trolling extends to more than one sign-on and that Andy is your altar-ego as the two oif you tend to appear together.

        Certainly you do seem to have a lot of personal experience of multi-thumb thumbing if you know what I mean 🙂

        If you want offensive rants I suggest you return to the Darkside and look and see what they are saying about not only just about every other Scottish team but about Scotland as well. I believe in the UK and maintaining the Union with England & Wales but I am also a proud and patriotic Scot who isn’t a Nationalist, But I don’t hate the SNP or their supporters I just happen to think they are wrong but they are entitled to their opinion just as I am to mine

        I certainly will debate and advance my point of view as will they and the Scottish people will decide.

        For Rangers football fans to be involved and involve their club even if only by proxy in the abusive statements made about other Scots is almost beyond comprehension just like other obsessions they harbour deep in their psyche.

  34. mick

    @andy the under class totally united agianst verbal abuse from crooks in suits with loud mouths.

    • ecojon


      and talking French to boot 🙂

    • Andy

      What sort of person wishes cancer on anyone, especialy someone that has suffered directly from the disease, i thankfully have only had to deal with someone i knew well onve in my life but thankfully they beat it!

      You are so hypocriical its unreal and you cant even say it…so its not okay for green to joke about kids uniforms (wrong As it is) but it is okay for you wish pain and suffering on someone..get a grip!! Slam his remarks all you like but if ever a statement was bitter and twisted, one that ends ‘he deserves cancer for that’ is almost te epitomy!!

      Then you have the cheek to say life first. Hahaha, total clown, so embarrassing!!

      • mick

        @andy am not a clown and am not embarrassing thats my thoughts on the man a dont feel like that towards whyte or murray or any1 else its charlie and his mouth hes a wronger and thats that, a can hate and like its a free country ,

      • Andy


        Hahaha, you make me chuckle….You literally sound like a 10 year old, then again maybe you are 🙂

  35. Robert

    In the greater scheme of things I believe the £30k is a red herring, as the amount is only equivalent to Rangers selling a 100 season tickets or so. although I am sure Dundee United would be glad to receive the money.

    The real issue, as I see it coming of this is the SPL getting Rangers to waive any rights to the 2011/2012 SPL prize money as a condition the SFA registration, which as I understand will be divided out between the remaining SPL members. The reason why I see this as being the real issue is that I do not believe the Rangers newco or the SPL should be getting the money. It should go into the fund to pay the creditors of the Rangers oldco, which is what HMRC would expect in the absence of a Football Creditor Rule in Scotland.

    • ecojon


      I agree but it slightly saddens me that the money will be eaten up by D&P expenses and it will be lucky if the creditors get an extra penny in the £ from it.

      Still I would say it’s an issue for BDO if they ever start.

      The £30k is a total red herring and a ploy by the Ibrox ‘agenda’ strategy. But the SFA sidestepped the involvement by quite rightly avoiding being used as a financial clearing-house by Rangers so it fell back on an out-of-date May letter trumped by the July agreement which the ink wasn’t even dry on and signed by Charlie Barras Bhoy himself.

  36. mick

    the man who made the uniform comment was not in the wrong green is as a high profile figure to steep that low is sick

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 )

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s