Sir David Murray Condemns SPL “Witch Hunt” But Ignores All Criticism of His Board’s Conduct

Sir David Murray reacted to the decision of Lord Nimmo Smith’s Independent Commission in a way which was the lead story in Friday’s Herald.

I have re-produced the statement before, with my comments added in bold.

————————————–

“Murray International Holdings Limited (MIH) has noted the decision of the commission chaired by Lord Nimmo Smith appointed by the Scottish Premier League (SPL) to investigate alleged undisclosed payments by Rangers Football Club (Rangers).

“The decision not to strip Rangers of titles is satisfying and follows last year’s ruling of the First Tier Tax Tribunal in the long running and much publicised dispute with HMRC.

“The Commission recognised that the purpose of the relevant SPL rules was to promote sporting integrity and that Rangers gained no competitive advantage.

As I have mentioned before, the decision of the Commission was NOT that there had been no “unfair competitive advantage” to Rangers FC through the use of the EBT scheme. That was not considered by the Commission.

Nor did the Commission decide that there had been no attempt to gain an “unfair competitive advantage”.

The Commission did not determine that the players signed and played under the EBT scheme did not provide an “unfair competitive advantage”.

Instead the Commission decided that the “deliberate non-disclosure” of the details of the EBT scheme to the football authorities was in breach of the rules. For the technical reasons about registrations and ineligibility, the non-disclosure was the offence, not any consequent ineligibility.

There was no evidence before the Commission to show them how non-disclosure, on its own, might have provided an unfair advantage. There was no evidence about what other teams might have done, how what Rangers did differed from what other teams did and what effect that would have had.

So, in the absence of evidence the Commission could not find there was an “unfair advantage”.

I appreciate that I already seem to be a lone voice making this point. But it still needs to be made (even though I am sure some commenters here will repeat the line from the conclusion of the Commission saying there was no unfair advantage, without explaining the background).

 

“However, the Commission decided to ignore well established legal authority on the meaning of ”payment” as set down by the House of Lords in Heaton vs. Bell (Ref: (1969) TC 211) in reaching its decision. The EBT Scheme did not provide for payments from the Club to the players. Instead, the players received loans from independent trustees and the decisions to make those loans were made by those trustees alone. The decision of the First Tier Tax Tribunal supported this.

The FTT and the Nimmo Smith Commission dealt with entirely different matters.

Here the “charges” were of failing to disclose “EBT Payments and Arrangements”. The definition of EBY Payments and Arrangements was as follows:-

Payments made by or for Rangers PLC into an employee benefit trust or trusts for the benefit of Players, including the Specified Players, employed by Rangers PLC as Professional Players, Registered and/or to be Registered as Professional Players with the Scottish Premier League and Playing and/or to Play for Rangers FC in the Scottish Premier League and payments made by or for Rangers PLC into a sub-trust or sub-trusts of such trust or trusts of which such Players were beneficiaries, payments by such trust or trusts and/or sub-trust or sub-trusts to such Players and/or for the benefit of such Players and any and all arrangements, agreements and/or undertakings and the like or similar relating to or concerning any of such Players and payments.

As the above definition shows, the SPL considered that payments by Rangers into the trusts for the benefit of the players and payments into the trusts and sub-trusts of which the players were beneficiaries were covered. The issue for the Commission was NOT about “payments” directly to the players by the club.

 

“It is entirely erroneous and without foundation to state that a contribution to a trust and subsequent loan from independent trustees of that trust to a player is the same as Rangers making a payment to a player.

And that was not what the “charge” was. If oldco or newco considered that the definition was inappropriate, then this could have been challenged. The Commission decision gives no indication that it was. Therefore the assumption must be that oldco accepted the competency of the charges.  

 

The problems arising at Rangers brought no credit to Scottish football and have been a tragedy for the Club and its fans. They cannot be condoned. Similarly, however, and as stated previously, efforts to bayonet the wounded are equally unjustified and of no benefit to the Club or Scottish football.

And might Sir David care to comment on what those problems were, or who caused them…

I thought not.

And again we have the emotive “bayoneting of the wounded” argument.

Maybe I am not understanding matters clearly.

The SPL and SFA believed that there was a prima facie case that Rangers had broken the rules. The investigation and hearing led to a decision that Rangers had broken the rules, by way of “deliberate non-disclosure”. It hardly seems to be “bayoneting the wounded” by having a procedure which finds the accused guilty and only imposes a fine which will never be paid!

 

“Despite knowledge of the existence of EBT arrangements for 10 years, the SPL has never explained why this was only raised as an issue last year.

The attempts to re-write history continue. Many defenders of Rangers delight in pointing out that the EBT payments were in the accounts and therefore the SPL knew about them, or if they did not know enough about them, they only needed to ask. Why should Rangers be penalised for the SPL not asking them about it?

This ignores a couple of factors.

Firstly the accounts disclosed each year a lump sum for payments into the trusts for the benefit of employees. It did not break the figures down into payments for players and non-players. It did not disclose how much each player benefited by.

These were the precise details which the management and Board of Rangers decided deliberately not to disclose. In addition the Commission pointed out that the Board failed to take advice about whether or not they should be disclosed. As I said before, ignorance is no defence and wilful ignorance definitely is not!

Secondly the evidence was before the FTT that there were efforts to obstruct HMRC by way of non-disclosure, it being the City of London Police raid which brought the matter to light, and not full disclosure, or indeed any disclosure, by Rangers.

The Nimmo Smith Commission found that there was non-cooperation with the SPL by the administrators. Prior to that there was clearly no active assistance on this issue either.

 

The imposition of an irrecoverable fine on an entity which is now in liquidation is futile and only prejudices the ability of existing creditors to recover any money.

What else could the Commission do? Would Sir David Murray have preferred that a non-financial penalty, such as removal of titles be imposed? What about a suspension?

Would he have liked the fine to be imposed on the club and thus on newco?

And the concern for creditors is touching. Maybe Sir David could persuade some of his former players and employees to repay some of these never to be repaid (effectively) loans to the trusts with a request that the Trustees return the money to oldco’s liquidators? That might enhance the ability of creditors to recover money?

In any event the £250k fine won’t make much difference to the pennies in the pound paid to creditors simply because, even after the FTT, the debts run into many millions, and the funds available are only the change left over after the asset purchase at £5.5 million.

 

“It is saddening that so much time, effort and money has been expended in pursuing a retrospective witch hunt against an entity in crisis, as opposed to seeking to promote and further Scottish football for the benefit of the game and country as a whole.

Maybe the view of the SPL was that, as there was a prima facie case, now proved, that one of the two leading clubs in the country engaged in a policy, which was against the rules, of deliberate non-disclosure for ten years, it was appropriate to take action, rather than just letting it go?

Is it a “witch hunt” when a guilty verdict is imposed and which, at least according to oldco and newco, the verdict is not being challenged?

Sir David’s statement seems to suggest that he disagrees with the verdict too. Maybe he could fund the liquidators in an appeal against the verdict to the SFA?

————————————–

To conclude, I note that Sir David Murray makes no comment at all in response to the views of the Board over which he presided for much of the time in question. Instead one might say he is seeking to deflect criticism by his talk of a witch hunt and of bayoneting the wounded.

The simplest thing is to leave with the words of the Commission, none of which seem to be disputed, at least according to the statement. (All emphases are added).

We nevertheless take a serious view of a breach of rules intended to promote sporting integrity.

Greater financial transparency serves to prevent financial irregularities. There is insufficient evidence before us to enable us to draw any conclusion as to exactly how the senior management of Oldco came to the conclusion that the EBT arrangements did not require to be disclosed to the SPL or the SFA.

In our view, the apparent assumption both that the side-letter arrangements were entirely discretionary, and that they did not form part of any player’s contractual entitlement, was seriously misconceived.

Over the years, the EBT payments disclosed in Oldco’s accounts were very substantial; at their height, during the year to 30 June 2006, they amounted to more than £9 million, against £16.7 million being that year’s figure for wages and salaries.

There is no evidence that the Board of Directors of Oldco took any steps to obtain proper external legal or accountancy advice to the Board as to the risks inherent in agreeing to pay players through the EBT arrangements without disclosure to the football authorities.

The directors of Oldco must bear a heavy responsibility for this.

While there is no question of dishonesty, individual or corporate, we nevertheless take the view that the nondisclosure must be regarded as deliberate, in the sense that a decision was taken that the sideletters need not be or should not be disclosed.

No steps were taken to check, even on a hypothetical basis, the validity of that assumption with the SPL or the SFA.

The evidence of Mr Odam (cited at paragraph [43] above) clearly indicates a view amongst the management of Oldco that it might have been detrimental to the desired tax treatment of the payments being made by Oldco to have disclosed the existence of the side-letters to the football authorities.

[108] Given the seriousness, extent and duration of the non-disclosure, we have concluded that nothing less than a substantial financial penalty on Oldco will suffice.

Although we are well aware that, as Oldco is in liquidation with an apparently massive deficiency for creditors (even leaving aside a possible reversal of the Tax Tribunal decision on appeal), in practice any fine is likely to be substantially irrecoverable and to the extent that it is recovered the cost will be borne by the creditors of Oldco, we nevertheless think it essential to mark the seriousness of the contraventions with a large financial penalty. Since Issues 1 to 3 relate to a single course of conduct, a single overall fine is appropriate. Taking into account these considerations, we have decided to impose a fine of £250,000 on Oldco.

[109] It is the board of directors of Oldco as a company, as distinct from the football management or players of Rangers FC as a club, which appears to us to bear the responsibility for the breaches of the relevant rules. All the breaches which we have found were therefore clearly committed by Oldco.

Sir David provides no answers to any of these serious allegations. Instead he has, apparently successfully, thrown up the “witch hunt” smokescreen.

Maybe one day he will answer the criticism, but I am not holding my breath.

Is this deliberate misrepresentation of the verdict? Or maybe Sir David did not take advice about the verdict and thus has again fallen into error? Who knows…

Posted by Paul McConville

Advertisements

138 Comments

Filed under Football Governance, Rangers, SPL

138 responses to “Sir David Murray Condemns SPL “Witch Hunt” But Ignores All Criticism of His Board’s Conduct

  1. Bill Fraser

    Does anyone else get the feeling that LNS proves that the perpetrator brought the victim to within 99% of death but as such cannot be charged with murder?

    • Adam

      Another crass connection to “murders” Was the same with the EBT ruling as well.

      LNS, just like Paul McBride before him, drove a bus through ridiculous rules. No sporting advantage was gained.

      • mick

        there was sporting advantage lns is a liar and has cheated sPort in his findings in my eyes he’s as bad as the accused

      • carl31

        LNS sat in judgment. He did not advocate. There were numerous comments by him that what was put before him was not adequate to make a proper judgment.

        • mick

          @carl its a whitewash and should be took to CAS IT HAS BASICLY SCURED HIGH CROWDS AT SEVCODOME WHILE ALL THE OTHER TEAMS WILL SEE CROWDS DWINDLE FROM THERES ITS UNFAIR AND MUST NOT BE ACCEPTED UNTIL TITLES ARE STRIPPED FOR CHEATING AS IT HAS BEEN PROVEN VIA THE FINDINGS AND THE PUNISHMENT DOES NOT FIT THE CRIME

          they are cheats then now and forever so all the more reason to keep a watchful eye on them

          • I agree Mick. Sevco will probably see an increase in attendance. They were happy to cheat their way into this mess. But oh so overjoyed to cheat their way out! It says a lot for them!
            Equally other teams attendance will drop off, as fans are sickened and refuse to contribute to such a corrupt game. The two faces of the Scottish public. One honest. One corrupt.

            • mick

              its out of order and a total white wash a will always stand by celtic but they have to do the right thing and demand CAS if not its game over for 10s of thousands of fans lets face it the penny dinner days are over should we disband celtic and give profits to africian charitys and send our season book money to charity to if celtic fail to act on this coruption its game over LNS might have queiled the anger mob but he has created a other 1 and its just not celtic fans the whole fanzine sites are in up roar

          • Maggie

            @mick
            I say this as a friend mick,you’re doing yourself no favours with your
            posts on this issue.You’re merely giving them ammunition with
            which to attack you.
            They were found guilty as charged on all counts mick and no
            matter how they spin it,are a disgrace to themselves,football and
            this country,morally and ethically.
            LNS acted correctly at all times,he can only find on the issues before
            him and how they were presented to him.That SDM,Chico and Sally
            are now rewriting the judgement and the history of their downfall
            should surprise no one.What did you expect mick? That they would
            suddenly have a damascene moment and come over all truthful
            and penitent……It wasn’t that bad boy Craig Whyte that did it,it was
            me,SDM, in the boardroom with the EBTs,all along, Cluedo style,

            mick,oldco are dead,newco are in Div3,their CEO is a buffoon at
            loggerheads with his Chairman,they have no line of credit from a bank,
            there are rumours of winding up orders,the old favourite songs are
            back in favour causing them more shame and Sally is still their manager.

            If they ever get back to the top tier when Chico changes his mind,
            they will languish in the bottom half and probably be fighting off
            relegation every other year.They are a busted flush and infamous
            worldwide for their shameful sectarian attitude,and the corporate
            malfeasance of the old club regime.Found guilty by a law lord and
            two eminent QCs.That’s GUILTY mick,on ALL charges.We know that,
            and believe me,they know that too.
            Don’t shame yourself or our club mick,by posting ill thought out
            insults.In fact mick,don’t post replies to the trolls at all.
            If no one plays their game,they’ll find a new game elsewhere.

      • You can maybe illuminate me, if no advantage was gained what was the point of the EBT’s? What was the motive if not to sign players that they would not be able to field otherwise? I’m sure if the subject of this case was not oldco rangers, you would be asking the questions that the majority of fans who are not in the oldco camp are asking. I know this part of the case is over, but you must realise that this finding is nowhere near satisfactory in coming to an understanding of what went on. I have never been interested in stripping titles from or fining a dead club, but I would have liked to have seen a mature and constructive verdict that could have been of benefit to the structure of Scottish senior football, but this decision has left itself open to all sorts of interpretations and one of them is that the people who ruined oldco have managed to deflect again criticism from the people who should be squealing for their heads, ie rangers supporters. If this had happened at my club I would want these men held properly accountable. This thing has been muddied again and in the long run this will eat away at the fans trust in how the game is run. I can understand your giruy attitude, but surely you must be asking yourself about the integrity of not only the way oldco was run, but how the SPL, SFA and others have handled this situation. You must admit, even if it is only to yourself that Scootish football will fail if it is run for the benefit of one or two clubs, to the detriment of all the rest.

    • mick

      Hi bill did you get bail (fly the fleg) lol sevco are in div 3 murrays skint deadco died its lOl at them forever And the world knows there cheats

      • Maggie

        @mick
        Thanks pal,stay classy.

      • Maggie

        @Fra
        Thanks Fra,one does one’s best 🙂
        The only thing that makes me angry is when they call us haters
        and bigots for wanting to see justice and fairness prevail,but that
        is what motivates them,so obviously they assume that’s what motivates
        others.

        I will admit to loving and mocking their predicament as I feel karma
        has been more than a fair and just judge to them,though long
        overdue.Our club don’t cheat,lie,try to defend the indefensible,
        wreck city centres or receive bans from attending games because
        of the offensive nature of our fans songs.No law lord has been
        called upon to adjudicate on our business practices.The eminent
        QC who was our staunchest defender ( may he rest in peace) was
        not caught bang to rights singing the most offensive party tunes
        ,nor is our manager a sleekit,underhanded whisperer.
        So I would say Fra,that Celtic are in a pretty great place right now,
        and a decent wee result in Turin would just top a great season,even
        if we don’t go beyond the last 16 of the CL.

        • Adam

          Holier than thou.

          Whiter than white.

          Greater than good.

          Nothing to see here, it’s all them.

          Delusion of grandeur.

        • gortnamona

          Maggie
          What really pisses them off is that while Celtic supporters are generally regarded as genuine sportsmen, Rangers supporters are seen as sectarian Neanderthal thugs. And what pisses them off even more is that they know it is true.

  2. Gerry

    An excellent piece Paul. From the moment there was a leak about the commission not stripping titles we have endured terms like, witchhunt, vindication, bizarre, needless and my personal favourite administrative error.
    The verdict was Guilty but because titles remain intact there has been a concerted attempt to dress this whole sorry affair up as victory for Rangers.
    Contrition, apparently, is not a response that either the old board or new management of TRFC recognise or posess.
    On so many occasions, during this whole RFC scandal, a simple statement of remorse would have defused an alrady inflammatory situation.
    Instead Commodus Green continues with his control the mob style and his football manager is happy to play along.
    Vindication belongs to those who chose to bring a case against RFC because as a guilty verdict clearly displays there was wilful acts of wrongdoing over a period of 11 years.
    That siad the footballing authorities in this country have not came out of this saga smelling of roses because they failed from day one to treat this farce without fear or favour and repeatedly tried to provide conviluted solutions when simple clear leadership punishing offenders was all that was required.

  3. carl31

    Sir David Murray remains sure that the payments were made by a third party.
    Non-disclosure of that ‘fact’ could be clearly shown to have resulted in sporting advantage since the players would have been ineligible. Being able to field ineligible players I would consider an advantage.
    Third party payments are against the rules.

    I’d suggest that SDM does Rangers more harm than good by continuing with the claim that old Rangers weren’t making the payments, but the trust was.

    • carl31

      On the ‘sporting advantage’ issue.
      There was none found under the terms of the SPLIC, but these terms, as set out in the Notice of Commission were inadequate.

      I’ve posted before on just one aspect of the inadequacy.

    • arb urns

      ‘payments’ or ‘loans’ carl that is the q?.

      lns it could be argued comes pretty close to winning the fttt appeal for hector

      the more you read of this the worse it gets. if heidi poon were neil dumcaster the ‘primae facie case’ would have had its belt and braces or perhaps bra and pants on before it stood naked infront of the commission.

      ah so !!

      • carl31

        S D M disputes that they were considered as ‘between Club and Player’ , but does not dispute that they are payments.
        It seems to me that they are third party payments by SDM’s logic.

        The third party payment question was not included in the charges.

      • Maggie

        @arb urns
        Lol 🙂 Heidi would have kicked ass,in-between making tea for
        everyone,doing the dishes,dusting his lordships desk,nipping out
        to Tesco for the “messages,” picking up something for lunch,before
        going home and putting on the washing and making the dinner.
        AND her hair and make up would have been Fabulous!
        If you want something done right get a woman to do it,Just saying
        guys 🙂

    • “…by continuing with the claim that old Rangers weren’t making the payments, but the trust was”.

      And just who paid the money into the trust?.

      • I have replied previously at length as to how the FTT(T) findings tied Rangers directly to payments ……prime example being the interchangability between payroll and trust payments, demonstrated as an example when player insurance cover kicked in, and further during adjustment prior to player transfer …. and then the ‘curious’ question of tax indemnities provided by Rangers ….. Worth a read on FTT(T) conclusion on this.

  4. Perhaps someone can help me. Every time I read something David Murray says, the words below, which have no visible connection to Mr Murray (and I am not suggesting that they have any connection at all), spring to mind. Can someone suggest why?:
    “Mr Black and his sons were Excluded Persons, yet sub-trusts in their favour were ‘opened’ incompetently…Given Mr Black’s controlling position, special conditions about taxing his bonus arise…in view of his active control exercised over the group’s activities, he seemed able to decide his own bonus apparently without reference to his co-directors…no excluded person shall be a beneficiary…Mr Black is an excluded person by virtue of being a major shareholder of MGM…”
    Mr Murray has an obvious right to comment on the Commission. I hope that “Mr Black” keeps his counsel, however. For if he were to comment, it would surely be brass-neckery of the highest/lowest order.

  5. dan

    Mr Murray is used to saying any old thing and getting away with it. Why should he change now? And I see Richard ‘Wee Cheeky Face’ Wilson is trying to muddy the waters by saying ‘Sandy’ is being accused of trying to help Oldco’s cause. I’ve not seen that accusation anywhere. All ‘Sandy’ did was inform LNS of the rules vis registration i.e. innocent until caught, and no retrospective guilt. Oh, and we should all just move on, says ‘Wee Cheeky Face’. What a surprise.

    And talking about churnalists, I hear Jabba is going to write a book on the LNS affair. That is possibly the worst news to come out of the whole sorry mess. I wonder what the title will be? ‘Great Lamb I Have Eaten’. ‘ Reflections On Supping With Sir David.’ ‘Pass The Mint Sauce Please’, –any other suggestions?

    • “Great lamb I have eaten” 🙂 a quality line!

    • carl31

      “Our Victory is Succulent”

    • arb urns

      Puma’s and Cheetah’s- an allegorical tale of registration and eligibilty- by Gym Trainer.

      or

      Hullo Hullo- we’re up to our nees in bloody gilt- by Sevconia Offtheradarwealth.

    • Maggie

      @dan
      “The succulence of the lambs”
      You’ll laugh,you’ll cry,but mostly you cry with laughter at this
      everyday story of how Rangers cannibalised itself,walked away
      from a debt mountain,learned no lessons and rose to the top
      of division three and stayed there.
      The blurb on the back page to read : Nobody likes us,we don’t
      care,GIRUY Timothy…… second name unknown.
      Any relation to persons living or dead ( Rangers oldco ) is
      purely coincidental.

      Available soon in Rangers’ superstores world wide.
      Apply now to hear Charles Green on his world wide
      promotions tour…..only 450 million tickets available….
      phone in now with your credit card details so we can pay
      you to attend….hurry,you don’t want to miss out.

    • Fra

      Started proposing a title but everything noted down and read back had tongue, licking and arse in the title. So I wont bother as I’m better than that folks.

  6. There is an unusual phenomenon currently taking place. A Mass collective dellusion, or perhaps an ongoing mass hallucination.
    A significant portion of our population believe that their football club was driven to the abyss by the combined efforts of the football authorities, Celtic & a sinister grouping of other clubs & their fans. They also believe that their liquidated club still survives but now carries no culpability for it’s previous anti social behaviour, Non payment of tax & debt evasion..
    Most recently they have indulged in celebrating being found guilty on all charges in a court concerning itself with the illegal manipulation of football law..
    The former master of this organisation now spouts accusations of baynoting his wounded, & his acolytes scream Witch Hunt!
    Further to being found guilty, & knowing that it is widely accepted that their former club almost by itself destroyed Scottish football, they now demand that they receive an apology. An apology from whom, & for what is anybody’s guess.
    If there is a psychiatrist or sociologist reading this blog I would be grateful if they could furnish me with the appropriate term for this pathology

    • “If there is a psychiatrist or sociologist reading this blog I would be grateful if they could furnish me with the appropriate term for this pathology”.

      Good point.

      As I see it, the Zombie fans were embarrassed at being caught out in such a fashion.

      Their dirty little secrets exposed.

      Who’d have thought such a thing could happen.

      They had no defence and so the cry was “its all lies”.

      When it became clear it wasn’t lies, the spin by Rangers PR dept. moved into top gear.

      The excuses and obfuscation varied from day to day but it was clear the ‘The People’ felt they were too dignified to suffer such indignities.

      When the truth is too painful to face, lies are much more comfortable.

      However, the Rangers tribute team are now in the third division after the club became bankrupt through their own actions and stupidity, and face a financially uncertain future in spite of ridiculous claims by Chazza Green of being the richest club in the world within a year and will be challenging for Champion’s League trophy.

      I’ve no claims to being a psychiatrist, but one word sums the Zombies.

      Defiant

    • Budweiser

      Mac

      ‘rangersitis’.

  7. mick

    @mac what you are watching is the rewriting of history to suit the handshake crew its up to us not to let it happen and continue till cas are on it

    The following can indicate a delusion:
    1.The patient expresses an idea or belief with unusual persistence or force.
    the violent baying mob with list

    2.That idea appears to exert an undue influence on the patient’s life, and the way of life is often altered to an inexplicable extent.
    rangers then rangers now rangers forever

    3.Despite his/her profound conviction, there is often a quality of secretiveness or suspicion when the patient is questioned about it.
    move along timmy nothing to see here

    4.The individual tends to be humorless and oversensitive, especially about the belief.
    the bullying any 1 saying negatives they are tagging them haters

    5.There is a quality of centrality: no matter how unlikely it is that these strange things are happening to him, the patient accepts them relatively unquestioningly.
    they dont question green or murray they just believe jabba

    6.An attempt to contradict the belief is likely to arouse an inappropriately strong emotional reaction, often with irritability and hostility.
    were no cheats civil unrest if you say that and take titles

    7.The belief is, at the least, unlikely, and out of keeping with the patient’s social, cultural and religious background.
    the big cup we need the big cup timmy got 1

    8.The patient is emotionally over-invested in the idea and it overwhelms other elements of their psyche.
    we will watch the cheats from the streets who cares who owns the deeds

    9.The delusion, if acted out, often leads to behaviors which are abnormal and/or out of character, although perhaps understandable in the light of the delusional beliefs.
    everything is fine sevco are rangers we did not die jabba said

    10.Individuals who know the patient observe that the belief and behavior are uncharacteristic and alien.
    say cheated have to say sorry

    msm and crooks in suits murray and co green and whyte has made them mental if you were to mention this to them in a pub you know what would happen and that is the reason they are mental and zombiefied

  8. Excellent summation of the situation Paul.

    We cannot be surprised by Minty’s antics.

    When the shit is flying he retires to his Charlotte Square bunker, and at the first sign of what he considers to be a glimmer of seemingly good news he’s back in the spotlight.

    Considering Rangers disgusting history he was the perfect fit as owner of the club.

    • Sally says he would trust LNS and his decisions, above remarks from elsewhere.
      Perhaps he would like to comment on LNS’s summation of failed business man Murray and hisboard of directors and the guilty as charged verdict on all 4 counts.
      Perhaps he would like to comment on the tens of millions of pounds that Murray’s companies failed to pay to the many people entitled, or on the yet to be announced final unpaid tax bill.
      Perhaps he would like to comment on the damage done to the national sport by Rangers, damage that it may not recover from!
      Perhaps maybe even a wee. mention is due, to the legal costs incurred in uncovering the truth behind Murrays “business practices” and the added extra cost to this by the obstruction and camouflage of these “business practises”. Costs as yet incalculable as many investigations are still ongoing.
      Perhaps he would also like to comment on the fact that LNS used the term “unfair sporting advantage”, and not “sporting advantage”. Until the UTTT is complete, Then this whole verdict may be overturned.
      Perhaps Sally, you should keep your big mouth for its only true purpose in life. Eating pies and lying to your ex wife.

  9. Coyote Briggs

    I don’t have much to say on all that’s happened in the recent LNS commission report and how the blue teams fans / media / phone-ins / manager / ex owner and current owner have been releasing statements and comments other than to say I feel as though I’m in an episode of The Twighlight Zone.

    Quite bizarre…

    Watch this space, in 10 yrs time watch how they all give a different version of history.

    Sally says the mighty Gers got relegated to division 3. Just one of a many mis-truths.

  10. mick

    the last time we ever played them there dead hope this cheers you up as they died chasing lions cheating timmy of his bragging rights how low they are and its proven

  11. Wasp

    Well said Paul

    Always best to look at the primary source and the comments from Lord Nimmo Smith are pretty damning when you manage to cut out the background noise.

    So much of what spills forth from Mr Murray is disengenuous but, at the end of the day, he more than most has a vested interest in not having the veil lifted from what was going on at the club at that time.

    It is faintly amusing that he has been ducking and diving all this time and, in the fullness of time, it may prove to all have been unnecessary.

  12. mick

    if your a tim and thats not enogh to cheer you up just think of them eating all the old irish nags in there burgers lol with a union flag on it sitting in there places saying we dont buy irish were britsh lol niegh surrender fly the fleg
    are on remand to so there you go pmsl

  13. Raymilland

    @Paul McC

    As the SFA is the appellant body of the LNS Findings; in your opinion; is the possibility open to any member club (other than RFC) to seek clarification by appealing the LNS decision?

    Every SFA club is directly affected by the decision; every member of the SFA must surely be entitled to ask the question already formed by SDM: “Despite knowledge of the existence of EBT arrangements for 10 years, the SPL has never explained why this was only raised as an issue last year.”

    It is my opinion that Murray should be the last person to ask the above question. The fact that the SFA ignored the above matter for over a decade; while their inaction enabled his club to benefit (i.e. financial and sporting advantage) it is in the interest of every club in Scotland to identify the culpable party.

  14. Monti

    OFF TOPIC: Dunfermline Athletic are having serious financial problems at this time, Rangers (deceased) can thank themselves for cheating this club out of a lot of money over the years! Good luck to DAFC in their fight for survival! HAIL HAIL!

  15. SairFecht

    Murray is effectivley saying he won’t pay the fine. Whyte has refused to pay his. The tax-free ‘loans’ – including Murray’s – will probably never be recouped. Despite being paid to a whole host of players and administrators whose combined efforts won Rangers their titles trophies over a sustained period these are not to be considered as rewards or remuneration – and therefore gained no competitive advantage. Logic is turned on its head, and the game we thought we knew is a farce.

    • Raymilland

      In the murky waters of Scottish football; bottom feeder RFC has been let of the hook by LNS. His findings were crystal clear; RFC players’ permits were in order (no illegal sporting activity) hence; not much fishy to report.

      On the other side of the bank; the SFA administrator’s landing nets need to be inspected due to pollution spewing from a broken facility in Mount Florida.

      Engineers have since identified the source of the problem; a spokesman for Scottish Water reported; “From what we can make of it, a main drainage system has been found to be blocked by what appears to a decade’s worth of shredded player’s registration forms.”

      Campbell Ogilvie was sought for his opinion; however his secretary confirmed that in a shocking turn of events; Mr Ogilvie’s clothes and personal effects have been found by the banks of the river Cart in the Southside of Glasgow.

      A police spokesman reported; “We are following a lead that Mr Ogilvie has disappeared to join a company trading under the name of Sunshine Desserts.”

  16. Adam

    The re-writing of history is most certainly happening…..starting right here on this blog.

    “LNS is independent. When he strips your titles, you can have no complaints” (sic) – Jan 13

    “LNS is a funny hand shaking liar and cheat” – Mar 13

    Add to that this constant myth that the players wouldnt have been at Rangers to win the titles if it wasnt for the non registrations……How can anyone prove that ? As LNS inferred, if all of those EBT were officially declared to the SPL, they would have likely been accepted and no questions asked from the SFA and SPL. Nobody can prove that it was the EBT and EBT alone that was the deciding factor in any of these players joining Rangers. Nobody can prove that Murray wouldnt have hiked the debt further by paying the correct oncosts on normalised salary.

    Just like pretty much every written word on every blog over the past 12 months, its full of hearsay, guesswork, manipulation and in some cases mis-information.

    I have said for weeks on the record that the LNS would draw the line under it for me……no matter how it falls. It has done so. Why cant others accept it and move on ?

    • Loadofmalarkey

      Would you want to deny anyone their right to appeal? I know you think this does not exist, but it would appear that it does.

      From the BBC website:
      On the commission verdict itself, Regan said: “The report is subject to appeal from both sides and, as the appellate body, it’s not really up to the Scottish FA to be passing any comment on the sanction at this stage.”

      • Adam

        I wouldnt deny Rangers a right to appeal but given that this was a commission set up by the SPL, then i cant quite get my head around them having a right to appeal against a decision reached by a commission they chose and set up.

        Just my opinion.

        • Raymilland

          @adam

          What are your exact concerns in regard to any appeal of the LNS decision?

          Are you not in the least bit curious as to question posed by SDM?

          “Despite knowledge of the existence of EBT arrangements for 10 years, the SPL has never explained why this was only raised as an issue last year.”

          • Adam

            I see no point in it going any further. I am fully aware of the incompetence of the SPL and the SFA. Its there for everyone to see. So to drag it back through another iteration just seems a complete waste of time.

            A decision has been reached. Its time to move on and stop looking back.

            • Raymilland

              @adam

              Keep the Blues Brothers In office was the cry!

              Rolling, rolling, rolling
              Rolling, rolling, rolling
              Rolling, rolling, rolling
              Rolling, rolling, rolling

              Rawhide

              Roiling, rolling, rolling
              Though the streams are swollen
              Keep them doggies rolling
              Rawhide

              Rain and wind and weather
              Hell bent for leather
              Wishing my gal was by my side

              All the things I’m missin’
              Good vittels, lovin’, kissin’
              Are waiting at the end of my ride

              Move ’em on, head’ em up
              Head ’em up, move’ em on
              Move ’em on, head’ em up
              Rawhide

              Cut ’em out, ride ’em in
              Ride ’em in, cut ’em out
              Call ’em out, ride ’em in
              Rawhide

              Keep moving, moving, moving
              Though they’re disapproving
              Keep them doggies moving
              Rawhide

              Don’t try to understand ’em
              Just rope, throw and brand ’em
              Soon we’ll be living high and wide

              My heart calculatin’
              My true love will be waitin’
              Be waiting at the end of my ride
              Move ’em on, head’ em up
              Head ’em up, move’ em on
              Move ’em on, head’ em up
              Rawhide

              Cut ’em out, ride ’em in
              Ride ’em in, cut ’em out
              Call ’em out, ride ’em in
              Rawhide

              Move ’em on, head’ em up
              Head ’em up, move’ em on
              Move ’em on, head’ em up
              Rawhide

              Cut ’em out, ride ’em in
              Ride ’em in, cut ’em out
              Call ’em out, ride ’em in
              Rawhide

              Rolling, rolling, rolling
              Rolling, rolling, rolling
              Rolling, rolling, rolling
              Rolling, rolling, rolling
              Rawhide

              Rawhide

            • Budweiser

              adam

              So it’s only an appeal if it’s rangers appeal? Not that it makes any difference as the appeal goes to the Sfa. Who’se president again? Aye you’re right – let’s move on.

        • Loadofmalarkey

          Regardless of what we both think, Regan’s comment makes it clear that the right does indeed exist. That said, I do think he has compromised the SFAs position with his statement. Whether or not that was deliberate on his part is also open to debate.

        • @sAdam

          Let me be sure I’ve got this right – “Rangers” should have a right of appeal, but this same right should be denied to the other party?

          No matter that the SPL set it up, the commission was independant.

    • You would have accepted the LNS verdict if Rangers were stripped of titles. I am sure you would have Adam, and it would have been easy for you to do so. Easy because you accept that Rangers were acting outside the rules. Easy because you believe in the word of law. But do you believe in justice? And do you think justice was done?

      • Adam

        I do believe in justice and i think justice was done. The fact remains that if all of these “bits of paper” were on the table, there would not have been a commission in the first place.

        It would be entirely different for me if the contents of the “bits of paper” would have meant that a player could not have played for Rangers in the competition but that is not what happened in this instance.

        • Raymilland

          @adam

          More Blues Brothers:

          Think (Think) think (Think) think (Think) think (Think)
          You think (Think) think (Think) think about it (Think)
          You better think (Think), think about what you’re trying to do to me
          Yeah think (Think, think), let your mind go, let yourself be free
          Lets go back, lets go back, lets go way on back when
          I didn’t even know you, you couldn’t have been too much more than ten (Just go on)
          I ain’t no psychiatrist, I ain’t no doctor with a degree
          It don’t take too much high iq’s to see what you’re doing to me
          You better think (Think) think about what you’re trying to do to me
          Yeah think (Think, think), let your mind go, let yourself be free
          Oh freedom (Freedom), freedom (Freedom), freedom, yeah freedom (Freedom)
          Oh now freedom (Freedom), freedom (Freedom), freedom, oh freedom (Freedom)
          Oh, right now
          Hey, think about it
          You, think about it
          There ain’t nothing you could ask I could answer you but I won’t (I won’t)
          I was gonna change but I’m not if you keep doing things I don’t
          Hey (Think) think about what you’re trying to do to me (What you’re trying to do to me)
          Baby, think (Think), let your mind go, let yourself be free
          People walking around everyday, playing games that they can score
          Trying to make other people lose their minds, be careful you don’t lose yours
          Yeah think (Think) think about what you’re trying to do to me
          Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah (Think, think), let your mind go, let yourself be free
          You need me (Need me) and I need you (Don’t you know?)
          Without eachother there ain’t nothing people can do
          Yeah yeah, think about me (What you’re trying to do to me)
          ‘Till the fall of the night, think about it right now
          Oh freedom (Freedom), freedom (Freedom), freedom, yeah freedom (Freedom)
          Freedom (Freedom), freedom (Freedom), freedom, freedom (Freedom)
          Right now
          Hey, you, think about it
          There ain’t nothing you could ask I could answer you but I won’t (I won’t)
          And I was gonna change but I’m not if you keep doing things I don’t
          Hey think (Think), think about what you’re trying to do to me (What you’re trying to do to me)
          Baby, think (Think), let your mind go, let yourself be free
          You need me (Need me) and I need you (Don’t you know)
          Without eachother there ain’t nothing people can do
          Yeah yeah, think about me (What you’re trying to do to me)
          ‘Till the fall of the night, think about it baby, right now
          (Think about, forgiveness) To keep me
          (Think about, forgiveness) Baby
          (Think about, forgiveness, think about it)
          (Think about, forgiveness) Forgiveness
          (Think about, forgiveness) Right now
          (Think about, forgiveness, think about it) Think about
          (Think about, forgiveness) Baby
          (Think about, forgiveness)
          (Think about, forgiveness, think about it) Think about it
          Think about (Think about, forgiveness) Forgiveness
          (Think about, forgiveness) Forgiveness
          (Think about, forgiveness, think about it) Don’t even breath a flew, ’cause of hey
          You had better stop and think before you think
          Think

        • No Adam, what happened in this instance was that the players WERE improperly registered, and were ineligible to play. The fact that the legislation covering this prevented a full prosecution, does nothing to mask this fact. Rangers were trying to cheat, Rangers did cheat, Rangers were caught cheating, and continue with the denial of said cheating.
          LNS dealt with the matter as laid before him. Was wise enough to insert the word “unfair” before sporting advantage. He has not cleared Rangers, of having titles stripped. He has merely left it pending. Pending the UTTT. decision. By no stretch of the imagination has justice been done I only hope the game can survive till such time that it is.

          • Adam

            All your opinion of course.

            • Adam

              No. Its your opinion. You state that Rangers tried to cheat. You state that Rangers cheated.

              Cheating is a deliberate action knowing that you are breaking the rules in order to gain an advantage. Lord Nimmo Smith did not find that.

              Thats the facts.

            • Loadofmalarkey

              Adam, no he didn’t. I dont think LNS made any claims about what Rangers intension were in breaking the rules. I also don’t think Rangers offered any opinion or reason about why they did not fulfil the rules, at least not to LNS inquiry, however they did in the FTT.

              It would be interesting side note to know if every other club since the formation of the SPL have been able to interpret and fulfil the rules.

              Outside the inquiry , Mr McCoist and others have stated that it was an administration error. If we take him at his word for this and if he was true to form he would be asking for the names of the people involved in this error and taking them to task for it, after all, it has been an embarrassing episode for Rangers, one that should have been easily avoided with competent people in place.

              Personally, I find that the logic of why the rules were not fulfilled to be far more compelling than Mr McCoist reason.

            • Adam

              Oh yes he did. He confirmed it was his belief that there “was no question of dishonesty, individual or corporate” in relation to the non disclosure.

              Again, that’s fact !

            • Loadofmalarkey

              Sorry Adam, you are indeed correct he did write that, but you should really have written the whole quote as he also stated that the non disclosure was deliberate. Do you know why Rangers choose deliberately not to fulfil the rules contrary to the claims of Mr McCoist and others that it was a admin error.

              “The directors of Oldco must bear a heavy responsibility for this. While there is no question of dishonesty, individual or corporate, we nevertheless take the view that the nondisclosure must be regarded as deliberate, in the sense that a decision was taken that the sideletters need not be or should not be disclosed.”

            • Raymilland

              @adam

              Deliberate non disclosure of information from one side met with non compliance of the regulation by the other; over a period of 10 years; an honest mistake by all concerned?

              Hardly a clerical error which ever way you look at it.

            • Adam

              Yes, so the Board decided the letters did not require to be disclosed because in their opinion, they were loans. Lord Nimmo Smith has confirmed in writing that he believes there decision making process was done in an honest manner, however he disagreed with the conclusion they reached.

              In other words, in his opinion, they never cheated, they simply got it wrong.

              That is exactly what his report says.

              That’s the facts!

            • Adam

              @ Raymilland
              March 3, 2013 at 8:05 pm

              We know Celtic fans will never believe it was an honest mistake, but the facts of the matter is that Lord Nimmo Smiths judgement was that it was an honest mistake.

              He was the one in the possession of all the facts. He was the one who had access to both solicitors and all the key witnesses.

              Having considered all of the above and taken his time over things, it was his opinion, and that of his two learned friends, that their was nothing dishonest about the non disclosure.

              It was the findings of the commission that the Board of Rangers football club got it wrong. They did not “cheat”, as to “cheat” is to do something dishonestly or knowingly against the rules.

            • Adam, Rangers were found guilty on all 4 charges of rule breaking. Breaking the rules is cheating. Staying within the rules is not.

            • Adam

              Look up the word “cheat” in any dictionary and on each occasion it will make reference to “deceit”,”fraud” “unlawful” “trickery” “dishonesty”

              An unconscious and honest breaking of the rules is not cheating. That’s what LNS found. That’s what he ruled.

            • A loophole is an ambiguity in a system, such as a law or security, which can be used to circumvent or otherwise avoid the intent, implied or explicitly stated, of the system. (Wiki)
              Unlike most loopholes which are researched and then legitimately exploited, This escape hatch was “found” retrospectively to get Rangers, and the SFA off the hook(unfortunately it appears player registrations are not afforded the same luxury)

            • Raymilland

              @adam

              You are happy to move forward as things stand, I am not.

              Accountability of the administrative ‘cock up’ by the governing bodies needs to be made public. Is that an unreasonable proposition?

              A change of personnel at the top of each organisation is a minimum requirement, do you agree with that?

            • “An unconscious and honest breaking of the rules is not cheating. ”

              “Ignorantia juris non excusat.” There was nothing “unconsious” about deliberate non-disclosure of payments to players via the EBT scheme.

              RFC1872 board knew fine well that what they were doing was “dodgy” to say the least – why else would they admit, before the FTT sat, that at least 31 of the EBT sub-trusts set up for players were liable for social taxes?

              RFC1872’s own QC stated at the FTT that the side-letters were not disclosed because of the tax implications, now you’re arguing that it was an “honest mistake”? Who should we believe; you, or an eminent QC (who was in full possession of the facts)?

          • Raymilland

            @adam

            I accept what you say regards the non disclosure issue on the part of RFC. LNS made his opinion clear on that matter. The question that requires immediate attention:

            “Despite knowledge of the existence of EBT arrangements for 10 years, the SPL has never explained why this was only raised as an issue last year.”

            Attention must now shift toward the administrators.

            Is it plausible that the administrator had no appreciation of the rulebook? You have already been critical of the abilities of the officers in charge at the SFA/SPL; their ineptitude would necessitate formal inquiry of their handling of the matter from the outset right up until the LNS commissions’ findings.

            • Adam

              I would say probable rather than plausible Ray. Both of them are inept beyond belief. Always have been. Im not sure how they will change though. 😦

    • Loadofmalarkey

      It is obvious that fans will attempt to rewrite history in their own sphere of influence, to suit their own allegiances and you are correct that it is happening here and on other blogs. That is only to be expected. I am not so sure that such revisionism should be expected by the likes Murray, Green, McCoist etc.

    • parmahamster

      When you and your ilk, Adam, accept that the club responsible for the tax-dodging, unpaid bills to police, ambulance, magicians, etc, are no more, then we’ll consider moving on.

      Until then go troll elsewhere.

      • Adam

        Until then, you will continue to talk about a dead club a team in the 3rd division you don’t care about. 🙂

        • Ally McMoist

          “the facts of the matter is that Lord Nimmo Smiths judgement was that it was an honest mistake.” – No it wasn’t. Show me where LNS used the words “honest mistake”?! It was judged to be DELIBERATE NON-DISCLOSURE.

  17. dl2068

    Obviously you have become Internet bigots on here, not all, we were told to honour LNS judgement , and, now it’s a whitewash, I don’t post on here much, but , Adam and all the other Rangers fans, please leave them to it, they have nothing else in this world to be happy about, their hate for our club surpasses their own love for their own club. Paul, you feed off the trolls as your blog would not have the same attention if it wasn’t a post about The Rangers EVERYDAY, example, over at Scotzine, just check the comments section outwith Rangers! Zilch, or very few, what happened over the last year has turned decent people into bampots/bigots and its time to let them wallow in their own hatred and move on.

    • Well said that man , they do not love their own team they hate Rangers it must eat at them they seldom talk about septic it’s always Rangers , hate , bile and venom , everyday something else , how can sleep at night with so much hatred in their bones ? But to all bears do what I do , take it as a compliment that although in div 3 we’re still the only show in town , luvin it !

      • AntoniousF

        the reason these people are not letting it go is because they love their clubs and want to ensure that their clubs futures are safeguarded against any group who may want to pervert the rules set down in order to gain an advantage.
        not that any club would have the audacity

    • Raymilland

      Love, hate, justice?

      I can’t wait for the movie!

  18. mick

    Rangers International Football Club PLC
    Artemis Investment Management LLP 4,286,000 7.43%
    Chairman of Artemis Investment Management Limited? Hamish Grossart, nephew of Sir Angus Grossart.

    All Speculative, of course. hearsay, guesswork, manipulation and in some cases mis-information.

  19. Mick , did you call a law lord a liar and a cheat ? I’ve told you repeatedly blame your intellectual ” friends” they told you the verdict and punishment before the trial ! Now all these legal men are at the top if their game , just as the late Mr McBride was , they know best that’s why they’re in the job ffs ! Now I’m not going to repeat this so please task it in , don’t listen to them ! Btw have you finished with my helicopter Sunday DVD ? I love the part when the commentator says ” and the helicopter is changing direction ” what’s yours ? Or do you want Rangers to give septic that title for making an eerrse of it and their bottle crashing AGAIN ?

    • parmahamster

      Hiya Allan, hiya pal!
      Funny how you never had such a high opinion of Paul McBride when he was alive.

    • cam

      Do you think that wee Skippy was on an EBT?
      Did the Gers players really go for a McDonalds?
      Was that not one of the best of days?
      Think of the pain inside Lenny’s heart that day,,,,,,and try not to smile.

  20. Strange his LNS was the man to finish of the mighty Rangers but when the lynch mob didnt get the verdict and punishment to their liking he’s a lying cheat ! Brilliant ! Next they’ll be boycotting games at breezeblock bvrd oops ! Sorry , that’s already up and running since August .

  21. Raymilland

    Has anyone been lynched, did I miss something?

  22. KennyE

    On the LNS verdict: The legal experts on here will recall when Master of the Rolls Lord Denning turned down the appeal of the Birmingham Bombing suspects despite knowing that the competence and independence of the Crown Forensics Service (and Dr Frank Skuse in particular) had been severely undermined in various other cases. When Lord Denning was asked about this many years later (he lived to 100), he responded that the public interest would trump all other considerations when hearing an appeal in an important case. In other words, he would send innocent people to jail for life rather than risk opening the floodgates to dozens of appeals which would have undermined the public faith in the justice system.
    All I am saying here is that judges are human beings and when they deliberate on a case they consider not just the evidence but the wider effect on society of the verdict and the penalty. Docking 1-5 titles was never contemplated and it was a fortunate happenstance that the wording of the regulations allowed a get-out however perverse and illogical.

  23. Raymilland

    @carson

    Commando you say; you’re in good company; I’ve just heard on the news that Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth has been temporarily removed from the ‘throne’ due to a severe bout of gastroenteritis.

    I sincerely wish her a speedy recovery and return to duty.

  24. In summary then, Five Unimpeachable Facts 

    1. The LNS Commission dealt “only” with the question of OLDCO failing to disclose player EBT Payments  and Arrangements. A definition was given to LNS of the meaning of the terms (a) EBT Payments and (b) Arrangements and the Commission was framed around 3 separate points or matters – Described as Issues 1 to 3.

    2. To mark the seriousness of Rangers FC’s contraventions of Issues 1 to 3 the Commission  decided to impose a fine of £250,000 on OLDCO. Meaning Rangers FC were found guilty of contravening every Issue under investigation by the Commission.  That would be 100% guilty as investigated and the non-disclosure of the side letters was a breach of the SPL/SFA registration conditions because….

    3.LNS stated that SPL rules in his view should be interpreted to agree with related SFA rules and Rule D1.13: States a Club must, as a condition of Registration and for a Player to be eligible to Play in Official Matches, deliver the executed originals of all Contracts of Service and amendments and/or extensions to Contracts of Service and all other agreements providing for payment, other than for reimbursement of expenses actually incurred, between that Club and Player, to the Secretary, within fourteen days of such Contract of Service or other agreement being entered into, amended and/or, as the case may be, extended.

    4. Rangers FC and a slight of hand. There is a difference between player Registration and that same player receiving a payment under the arrangements of that Registration.  In the world of Rangers FC the existence of side letters and or associated player payments are irrelevant “UNTIL AFTER” the Registration process is completed. So the player Registration is completed as per the Rules. Afterwords the player plays and activities a payment and, as LBS confirms, only then a breach of the Registration rules – but “NOT UNTIL  he’s been paid. At the point of Registration all is well in the world of David Murray/Rangers FC. Player Registration is fine until (a) player kicks a ball (b) gets paid as per ball kicking side letter.

    5. So over to the SFL/ SFA. 
    The LBS Commission has found Rangers FC guilty as investigated and the non-disclosure of the side letters was a breach of the SPL/SFA registration conditions. 

    The Commision fine is for “creating” or issuing side letter arrangements. Not for “using” side of letters. 

    Ball kicking activation or the use of side letters is a subsequent breach of Registration Rules. 

    Any SFA/ SPL imposed fine on Rangers FC for breaching the Registration of players Rules has not yet been declared.

    Meaning an SFA/SPL sanctions for “the use of players” who’s registration was subsequently invalidated because of OLDCO (post registration) activating non- disclosed side letter payment arrangements is still pending. 

    STILL PENDING…

  25. abrahamtoast

    Does this £250,000 fine represent a “football debt”?

    If so, will it fall to newco to make payment; did Green not make a commitment to pay “football debts”?

  26. Budweiser

    Paul

    Did they find any witches? I’m looking for one.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s