Sandaza Sacked By Rangers – “Gross” or “Serious” Misconduct? – And What Happens Next?

And so Francisco Sandaza’s fears came to pass.

The Sun had reported on 30th March:-

FRAN SANDAZA was last night seeking legal advice amid fears his Rangers career is over. The striker was yesterday suspended for a second week after a meeting with Ibrox bosses.

Gers are still investigating how Sandaza was duped into revealing contract details during a recorded conversation with a spoof agent. During the call the former Dundee United and St Johnstone ace also insisted he’d be willing to leave the Division Three club for more money.

Injury-hit Sandaza is taking advice from the Professional Footballers’ Association’s legal team as it’s believed Ibrox chief Charles Green is keen to offload the Spaniard.

Boss Ally McCoist said yesterday: “Sandaza isn’t back in the squad. He’s still suspended, pending an internal investigation, which is continuing. I’ve got no idea how long that will last. Obviously, I’d think it would be in everyone’s best interests if it’s sooner rather than later. But I couldn’t put a timescale on it. We will find out what’s happening and then we move on.”

It’s expected Gers will now offer Sandaza — who’s only scored twice this season — a cut-price deal to leave the club. But it’s unlikely he would accept and will seek further legal assistance if Rangers insist on showing him the exit door.

Last night Rangers released the following statement:-

RANGERS announced today that the Club has decided to terminate its contract with Francisco Sandaza. The player has been advised of the situation.

Francisco spoke at length to someone posing as an agent and engaged in a conversation which the Club believes to be a material breach of his contract of employment.

The player was suspended but after careful consideration and a hearing with Francisco and his representatives, the Club, and our advisors, believe that dismissal is the appropriate course of action.

The termination is subject to the right of appeal under SFL rules and there will be no further comment from Rangers on this issue.

It is very rare for a football player to be dismissed, especially in a situation where, by implication, gross misconduct has been established by the employer.

The main reason for this is financial. If a football team dismisses a player, then its hold over the player in the form of his registration would be lost as well. The player is then able to sign elsewhere as a free agent. The former employer would lose any right to a transfer fee.

Normally dismissal is only applied to players in lower division teams where the players will have no re-sale value.

High profile, or high value, players are rarely sacked. For all of Mario Balotelli’s much publicised nonsense, Manchester City, even the rich as Croesus Manchester City, did not sack him, for fear of losing millions of pounds.

For all his escapades, Manchester City chose not to sack Mr Balotelli

For all his escapades, Manchester City chose not to sack Mr Balotelli

The only one I can think of who was sacked was Adrian Mutu. He was caught in a targeted FA drugs test. He tested positive for cocaine and was sacked by Chelsea.

However Chelsea pursued Mr Mutu himself seeking damages for breach of contract. The case is still not resolved, and is presently before the American courts! The article linked here, by Romanian lawyer Smaranda Miron, gives the details of Mr Mutu’s travails with Chelsea.

Mr Mutu still owes Chelsea an enormous amount of money

Mr Mutu still owes Chelsea an enormous amount of money

The bottom line is that Chelsea have been awarded damages of €17 million but even now, eight and a half years later, not a penny has been paid to Chelsea.

As for Mr Sandaza, he was signed by Rangers on a three-year contract in August 2012. He signed despite interest elsewhere. He was quoted as saying:-

“I had some offers from the Second Division in Spain and from Cyprus and Greece, but Ally called me a week ago and said to me about the project here.

“It’s a long project and we start from zero, but I’ll go for it and I think we will come back soon and I will do my best to be a part of that.”

Mr Sandaza though is not around for the long project, subject to any appeal he might pursue.

Mr Sandaza in happier times with Rangers

Mr Sandaza in happier times with Rangers

Any external appeal, to the SFL, or to an Employment Tribunal, is NOT asking the decision-maker what it would have done. Instead the question is whether or not the decision to dismiss is “fair”.

A very helpful case analysing the issues regarding gross  misconduct is Graham v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Jobcentre Plus) [2012] EWCA Civ 903 (05 July 2012). The decision from the English Court of Appeal can be read in full here.

Graham v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Jobcentre Plus)

This case looked at the difference between “gross misconduct” which entitles an employer to summarily dismiss an employee and “serious misconduct” which does not.

Mrs Graham (G) an Advisory Service Manager in a Jobcentre with a 30 year unblemished record with her employer, was summarily dismissed for what her employer claimed was “gross misconduct”. G helped Mr Moss (M), an acquaintance of her daughter, who had a difficult family background and was struggling to live on benefits, to find a job. Having investigated a number of allegations, G’s employer found that G had:-

  1. gained access to an acquaintance’s records;
  2. dealt with of job search interviews on behalf of an acquaintance;
  3. breached security by taking M into the staff canteen; and
  4. left her computer and smartcard unattended whilst allowing M access to her computer.

All of these were potentially in breach of the employer’s “Standards of Behaviour”. G’s employer found that G’s conduct amounted to “gross misconduct” and dismissed her without notice.

She brought a claim for unfair dismissal which was upheld by the Employment Tribunal. When the Employment Appeals Tribunal overturned the ET’s decision, she successfully appealed to the Court of Appeal..

The Court stated that the position is that, in considering the fairness of a misconduct dismissal, the court must ask itself three questions:

  1. Did the employer carry out a reasonable investigation?
  2. Did the employer believe that the employee was guilty of the misconduct complained of?
  3. Did the employer have reasonable grounds for the belief?

Whilst the Court  of Appeal, in this case, answered “yes” to the first two questions, in answering the third question, the Court asked itself whether the employer had reasonable grounds to believe G was guilty of “gross misconduct” to which it found the answer to be “no”.

The Court found that G’s conduct amounted to “serious misconduct” under her employer’s disciplinary process but did not amount to “gross misconduct”. Her summary dismissal was therefore outside the band of reasonable responses in the circumstances. (The Court also took into account G’s long service and exemplary record) and was therefore unfair.

The Court concluded:-

The Tribunal was in my judgment entitled to find that to respond to such conduct as was established by instantly dismissing an employee with 30 years unblemished service was outside the range of reasonable responses.

This emphasises that there is a difference between gross and serious misconduct and that this difference can impact upon the fairness of a misconduct dismissal.

“Gross misconduct” is generally accepted as being conduct so serious as to justify dismissal without notice or payment in lieu of notice, which could be for a first time offence. There is no statutory definition of what constitutes gross misconduct and to a certain extent it is for employers to decide whether misconduct is to be considered as “gross”, “serious” or otherwise. In determining what amounts to “gross” misconduct, context is paramount. What amounts to gross misconduct should be considered in relation to the business and the role of the employee. ACAS provides a list of various matters which will usually be considered to be gross misconduct:

  • Theft
  • Dishonesty
  • Malicious damage
  • Fighting/assaulting another person
  • Serious incapability through alcohol or illegal drugs
  • Endangering the safety of others by breaching Health and Safety Laws
  • Fraud
  • Gross negligence
  • Serious insubordination

An employer may consider an instance of misconduct to be serious, but is it “gross” misconduct? The question for employers in these circumstances is this – is the conduct so serious and damaging to the business that it breaks the employment relationship between employer and employee? Does it make a continued working relationship and trust impossible? Was it a deliberate and wilful breach of the contract and/or does the conduct amount to gross negligence?

One relevant factor in Mrs Graham’s case was that, when the allegation came to light, she was not suspended, but instead moved to work elsewhere, with her retaining access to her computer system. This was seen by the Court as indicating that there had not been the required breakdown of the employer/employee relationship in this case.

Where conduct falls short of gross misconduct, summary dismissal would most likely be considered to be unfair, particularly where the employee has a long length of service with the employer and an otherwise unblemished record. In instances of misconduct it would be usual to give the employee a written warning, with a subsequent act of misconduct in a set period normally resulting in a final written warning.

How Should an Employer Decide if Dismissal is an Appropriate Response to Conduct?

In determining whether dismissal was a fair sanction in all the circumstances, the tribunal will consider the questions below. Employers should consider these questions in determining whether dismissal is an appropriate response to the conduct in question.

  1. Does the employer’s disciplinary procedure indicate what the likely penalty will be?
  2. Is the proposed sanction something that the employee knew was a possible outcome?
  3. How serious is the offence?
  4. What penalty has been imposed in similar cases in the past?
  5. Whether the behaviour of other employees is acceptable; is this employee being singled out?
  6. Is there enough evidence present to warrant the penalty?
  7. Are there any special circumstances which have a bearing on the severity of the penalty decision?
  8. Does the employee have a current disciplinary record (i.e. live warnings)? Is there a pattern of behaviour?
  9. Employee’s attitude – are they remorseful and unlikely to repeat the behaviour? Or, are they defensive and do not feel they have done anything wrong?
  10. Employee’s general record – what is their position? What is their length of service? What is their record like?
  11. Is the sanction reasonable in all circumstances?

How Does This Apply to Mr Sandaza?

Looking at Mr Sandaza’s situation, how likely is it that the contract or Employee Handbook spells out summary dismissal as a likely penalty for saying things he ought not to have said to a hoaxer?

Is he being “singled out”?

How serious an incident is this?

From what is publicly known (and we are not privy to the course of the investigative process) the decision seems to be heavy-handed. One wonders precisely what part of Mr Sandaza’s offence has led to dismissal.

Is it being duped and thus embarrassing the team?

Is it appearing to suggest he would be happy to by-pass the club to arrange a transfer?

Is it admitting that he came to Rangers for the money? (Unlike every other employee in the world who only does their job for the love of it?)

This decision comes against the background of Mr Green looking, it appears, to cut costs. Kevin Kyle left by mutual consent. Chief Scout Neil Murray, following his own suspension, has departed by agreement. Highly-paid goalkeeper Neil Alexander seems, from newspaper reports anyway, to fear being shunted out the Ibrox door, or if retained, at a far lower wage than he is presently on.

Charles Green seems to be in "Terminating" mood

Charles Green seems to be in “Terminating” mood

Oops! Wrong picture!

Oops! Wrong picture!

Is the value to Rangers of not having to pay Mr Sandaza worth more than they might get if they sold him? (And of course I am sure that Rangers did not consider such an issue in determining the appropriate outcome of the investigation).

What Will Happen?

To quote the great Murray Walker, “I don’t make predictions, and I never will!”

I will make an exception here.

I suspect Mr Sandaza will appeal. Having been dismissed, he will  not be paid whilst his appeal is ongoing. By the time an SFL panel considers his appeal it is likely that the build-up to next season will be in full swing and if he finds a new club, then he will reach an agreement with Rangers to drop his appeal and maybe get a few weeks’ salary as a “going away” present.

The matter would only make it to a court or Employment Tribunal if he was unable to find a new employer. In that case, what would he have to lose? In addition, he could offer in evidence the clubs who were looking to sign him last summer.

It would be very interesting to see precisely how Rangers arrived at the conclusion that Mr Sandaza was guilty of “gross misconduct” justifying his dismissal. Unless the matter heads to a Tribunal or court we are unlikely ever to find that out.

Posted by Paul McConville


Filed under Employment Law, Rangers

151 responses to “Sandaza Sacked By Rangers – “Gross” or “Serious” Misconduct? – And What Happens Next?

  1. Michael

    Can it go to an employment tribunal if he has less than 12 months service? Just asking. Any experts out there?

    • Rob G

      Doubtful, but if he tags on discrimination on the grounds of religion it could be interesting and may bump up his settlement.

  2. JohnBhoy

    Sandaza cannot pursue a claim for unfair dismissal at an employment tribunal because he was an employee of The Rangers for less than two years.

    Furthermore, an employer is entitled to dismiss an employer for ‘material breach of contract’. The breach has to be substantial to merit dismissal. There is conjecture that the disclosure to Sandaza’s salary was the material breach. This suggests that a secrecy clause (‘gagging clause’) was included in Sandaza’s contract. In relation to salary disclosure, a secrecy clause can be breached if the employee did so in order to determine if he was the victim of discrimination by his employer, thus providing evidence of a breach of the Equality Act 2010 eg equal pay claim.

    This case, and its implications are notable for a number of reasons. Significantly, to my recollection this is the first time in recent history that a footballer in Scotland has been dismissed for non-footballing reasons. Normally footballers who step out of line are disciplined by their manager. Ally McCoist appears to have had no input to this case, which is strange, either in disciplining his player or in supporting him. Importantly, who would want to play for The Rangers when ill-discipline is dealt with by reference to employment law?

    In my view, the actual punishment was disproportionate to the crime., particularly given the circumstances surrounding this case. I would sympathise with Sandaza if he felt let down by his manager and his club.

    • ecojon


      I take a different view on whether Sandaza has the possibility of taking legal action or not as set-out below.

      I agree it has all the makings of an interesting legal tussle but sadly, from that point of view, I don’t think it will ever come to that for a variety of reasons.

      In many ways I feel sorry for Sandaza and like you think the punishment way outweighs the possible ‘offence’ and it just goes to show that when we were all having a laugh at Tommy’s jolly jape little did we think of the pretty severe consequences of a young man who appears to have done nothing but support and praise Rangers.

      Looking at those who walked away they must be thinking: ‘There but for the Grace of God’ as who knows what would have happened to them in a bid to cut costs – sold to Lokomotiv Siberia no doubt or possibly even Honduras in a complex off-shore barter deal 🙂

      • JohnBhoy


        Yes eco I agree that there are exceptional circumstances in which an employee can make a claim for unfair dismissal to an ET irrespective of the two year employment rule and the one you highlight below – discrimination – falls into that category. In the first instance, Sandaza would have to show a prima facie case for discrimination under at least one of the nine protected characteristics listed in the Equality Act 2010:

        – Age
        – Disability
        – Gender realignment
        – Marriage and civil partnership
        – Pregnancy and maternity (I think we’ll exclude this one!)
        – Race
        – Religion and belief (interesting one given the future over Sandaza blessing himself)
        – Sex
        – Sexual orientation

        If Sandaza goes down the discrimination route then his legal representative will fire off a discrimination questionnaire either prior to the submission of an ET1 form to the employment tribunal or soon thereafter. The employer has 8 weeks in which to compete the questionnaire. The employer can ignore it but the ET panel will then arrive at their own conclusions, normally in favour of the claimant.

        A claim of race or religious discrimination, for example, would set the cat amongst the pigeons, particularly given the history of the old Rangers.

        • allyjambo


          Taking ‘Rangers’ to a tribunal stating religious discrimination would be a hard one to prove….surely?

    • I demand to know which contract he has breached……..the registered one, the one in the shredder or the other one……………..we must know the full details and rally behind the wronged party……jelly and ice cream again

  3. Monti

    Morning Paul, pmsl….. Am I right in saying Paul, if I was employed with a company ( which I am) & another company wanted to hire me,surely the details of this contract offer would be my business & not that of my present employer? Sevconians this is a conversation about employment,so look away now…..pmsl

  4. smartbhoy

    You usually need to be employed for at least 2 years before a claim can be accepted by an Employment Tribunal, but there are exceptions.

    How this will work under a footballers contract of employment, I don’t know.

    I’ve only dealt with Employment Tribunals through Union Representation and all employees had been employed for over 2 years before their dismissal.

  5. Auldheid

    If it goes before judges Sandaza will lose on current judge form.

  6. Rangers appear to have taken care to follow proper procedure and sound legal advice in arriving at their decision and have left open the option of an Appeal. In addition, do the SFA not have an arbitration system which applies? Presumably, if at the end of the day Sandaza sued, Rangers could counterclaim for loss of potential transfer value. If so, wouldn’t matters trundle on through the Courts for years?

    • ecojon


      I see you state: ‘Rangers appear to have taken care to follow proper procedure and sound legal advice in arriving at their decision and have left open the option of an Appeal’.

      I wonder if you are actually the Ibrox mole because only someone with access to top management level or the legal team involved would have a clue whether Rangers have taken care and followed proper procedure and received sound legal advice.

      However having read that bucket of whitewash I don’t think you are the mole but more likely someone with a PR background because even a useless lawyer or low grade manager would know that Rangers haven’t left open the option of appeal – that is not a option but a legal right that Sandaza has if he wishes to exercise it.

      • iain

        Our hero Eco still spouts his “if you don’t join in with all our hatred and closed minded attacks on Rangers…or even give them some benefit of any doubt then you are either a mole or one of the dozens of PR men employed to do nothing more than camp out on Sellick web sites spreading pro-Rangers disinformation!”

        What is he like??

        • ecojon


          Can you actually provide any examples of my ‘hatred’ towards Rangers or ‘closed mind’ attacks on the club?

          I think most posters on here know that I am a Celtic supporter whose opinions on Rangers are probably not those of the majority of my fellow fans and I have repeatedly stated I have no wish to see the team destroyed.

          I do hope we end up with a team run on a secure financial basis that doesn’t undermine Scottish Football as a whole and IMO that will take more than footballing success but a change of attitude and I am still unsure whether that can be achieved in the short to medium term. But the solution to that lies in Rangers hands as any attempt to impose it externally will fail IMO unless destruction of the club is counted as a success and that it not my position or wish.

          As to PR activity you should attempt to keep up – most of that is currently aimed at Rangers sites as Chico has a lot of very agitated Bears on his hands and ST time is fast approaching. In fact sometimes I reckon the PR posters outnumber the Bears 🙂

        • gortnamona

          Why don’t you give your own opinion of Sandaza’s dismissal instead of attacking ecojon? For myself, after reading Paul’s excellent piece and considering what information is available, I find it hard to accept that his behaviour could be construed as gross misconduct.

        • Monti

          I hated Rangers Iain, now what’s the operative word in there????

        • dan

          I think the word you’re looking for is ‘correct’.

    • JohnBhoy

      Hi hihiotrotro,

      Rangers may have ticked the boxes with regard to their procedural obligations under employment law but that remains to be seen (for example if Sandaza was not allowed to be present at his hearing or to be accompanied by a friend or a union representative then The Rangers would have compromised their legal position). It is not just the procedures that come into play in an employment tribunal but the cause(s) of the dismissal. The latter will be, I suspect, the focus of Sandaza’s legal case.

      The Rangers are also required under SFL and employment law to facilitate an appeal process, an obligation they intend to meet. The absence of an appeal procedure would trigger a claim for unfair dismissal.

      There is no avenue for a counter claim for loss of potential transfer value – The Rangers initiated the disciplinary action, delivered the verdict, exacted the punishment and therefore cannot sue themselves for the consequences of their own actions.

    • Kingseat

      Eh………..what transfer value is there for a player who has scored 2 goals in 6 months playing in 4th tier of Scotish football?! Teehee!!

  7. An unkind observer might think the timing of the hoax call and subsequent events couldn’t have worked out better for the Tribute Act than if they’d planned it.

    The club have won the third division, so they must be looking at releasing players with a view to next season.

    Chuckles has said this is the worst Rangers team ever, and McCoist said he needs ten or more new recruits for the next campaign.

    The ‘sacking’/release of backroom staff and others raises suspicions that the club are looking to cut costs.

    Could this mean they are tight for cash?

    If so, releasing a player like Sandaza would free up an immediate £4,500 per week, and even more in the next and subsequent seasons.

    It may be felt he hasn’t contributed as much to the team this season as was anticipated, so TommyinGlasgow’s phone call came at a good time, financially speaking.

    There seems to be no end to the entertainment being served up by Rangers 1 and Rangers 2, the Tribute Act.

    The circus now moves on.

  8. ecojon


    I’m not an expert but I believe the 12 month rule changed to 24 months after 5 April 2012.

    However it is my understanding that notwithstanding Sandaza not having 24 months service then he does have a right to appeal to an ET because from the moment an employee is actually employed they have the right not to be unfairly dismissed by their employer.

    There are a number of ways that an employee can be unfairly dismissed but as I have no detail of the process followed by his employer then I am unable to make any meaningful comment. However, one obvious ground of appeal that Sandaza might claim is Discrimination and I would be surprised if his employer would want that particular issue fully aired in public as there does appear to have been some issues previously in that regard.

    And then there is the question on which Adam and I have often crossed swords – just who is Sandaza’s employer. Adam is steadfast in his view that the contracts of employment of the pre-Sandaza era players are exactly the same as previously and have not been changed in any way. My position has always been that the terms and conditions might be the same, mainly because of Tupe, but the employer had changed from the oldco to newco in the shape of TRFCL.

    OK so Sandaza comes in after Tupe but does he have the same contract terms and conditions as his longer service colleagues and, indeed, does he have the same employer whoever that might be?

    The reason all that might be of importance is that the Players’ Union might be thinking that Sandaza is the tip of a Tsunami and that some preventative legal action on his case might be useful in the not too distant future for players who had the requisite 12 months service on 5 April 2012. Although on observing the Darkside it would appear that Bears had many more SPL ‘duds’ in line for the chop before Sandaza so I think the Sandaza case will be carefully watched by those at Ibrox who are new arrivals and wonder if they might be caught-up in cost-cutting should they be dismissed for whatever reason.

    In view of the bodies piling up at Ibrox in recent days it can’t be a very happy atmosphere for those left who will shoal together like threatened fish because it’s easier for predators to pick-off those on the edges.

    I once again will offer one of my favourtite Chinese proverbs: ‘When in the sea of the people swim like a fish’.

  9. smartbhoy

    If Sandaza had good advisors representing him at his disciplinary they’d have claimed Sandaza knew it was a hoax and was winding the hoaxer up. No case to answer. This will end up in the courts one way or another.

    • ecojon


      I think it well worth remembering that key employee and major shareholder Imran Ahmad was also hoaxed by Tommy and even after he knew who Tommy was other phonecalls followed if my memory serves me correctly.

      It would appear that Mr Ahmad was not dismissed and I seem to remember that money was even offered for Tommy to leave Glasgow with his family and that he was invited to Ibrox to meet with Chuckles. I am suggesting no impropriety on Imran or anyone else’s behalf and probably they were just playing along for the laughs.

      I really will need to go back and listen to those tapes and refresh my memory and I even seem to think that the finance director Brian Stockbridge was with Imran when the calls were being made.

      I wonder if anyone has any idea who was involved in the Sandaza investigation and who sat in judgement of him.

      • iain

        Perhaps Imran wasn’t dismissed because he didn’t ask Tommy to find him a new club, on better terms (after helpfully telling his current terms), whilst telling Tommy to do it on the QT and not mention it to Rangers? And perhaps Imran didn’t break any football rules (you know those pesky “tapping” rules?), or his contract with Rangers in the process?

        Just askin’

        • JohnBhoy


          An employee cannot be dismissed for seeking alternative employment, even on better conditions. In fact online employment agencies exist for that very purpose, including self-promotion sites such as LinkedIn. Indeed, potential employers often ask for details of your current salary. The questions here boil down to: a) did Sandaza materially breach his contract of employment and b) if so, did his actions amount to gross misconduct?

          Dismissal, the ultimate sanction, is very severe and a punishment of last resort. It not only deprives an individual of employment, it also puts a stain on their character. Rumour has it that Gazza used to wind up opposition players by telling them what he earned in a day compared to what he thought they earned in a year – humour in one era, dismissal in another. I have every sympathy with Sandaza.

          • Maggie

            Hey there stranger,glad to see your return to the fold.I’ve been posted
            missing myself recently…..” home improvements” the two most hideous
            words in the English language,well those and “spring cleaning” which
            inevitably follow.
            I too feel sorry for Sandanza,poor guy,he says nothing controversial
            about Sevco,which is what Tommy was hoping for I assume, and still
            gets the heave ho.Most definitely a case of Chico looking to cut the
            wage bill.I hope he’s got good advisors and he takes them for all
            he can get,finds a great club and bangs in the goals,brilliant revenge.

            • JohnBhoy

              Hi Maggie, dipping my toe back in. Yes, Sandaza has been badly treated. Ally should have defended his player – sends the wrong message to the rest of the team. Morally, it was the right thing to do too.

            • tykebhoy

              Morality and newco/oldco Rangers? Really? 😉

  10. Dhougal

    Another great piece o business by The Rangers Paul ,more money down the drain.Read about a wee rumour on TBD last night that wee Craigy ”bhoy” Whyte has surfaced seeking some cash fae Castle Greyskull .Story was to be in todays Sun but was ”pulled”………..know owt ???

    • Monti

      Maybe he wants his £1 back pmsl….or as I suspect, he indeed holds ‘ra deedz’! Pmsl go get them Craig…..

    • Ed Paisley

      Agent Whyte, double-oh zero, has never really left the scene has he. He has his voice recordings of David Murray and Grier and the rest (Green?) – and yet Craigy has largely taken all the opprobrium without a squeak. I think he is biding his time until he demands his cut to maintain his silence. Lets face it – Craig Whyte is such a notorious figure these days that he can’t return to his old job exploiting company law.

  11. Thomas

    Paul I think you nailed it with is his value to Sevco greater by not being paid or sold on.Sounds like if he could delay all payments, eg.paye £ he would, but that wouldn’t happen again would it?

  12. Ed Paisley

    The interesting point for me is that Rangers are cutting costs already – and surely Sandaza is the only player they have who is SPL quality. Charles clearly has his eye on stretching the £22m (£17m now?) until season 15/16 when he expects to be rubbing shoulders with Celtic FC (1888).

    I bow to Paul’s superior knowledge on legal matters but as a layperson I wouldn’t think that summary dismissal was reasonable punishment for an employee being duped and recorded without his knowledge. If he was speaking to a journalist then that is different.

    Maybe Rangers will do the honourable thing and pay his salary until he gets a new job on a similar salary (Yes Charles, spelt HONOURABLE).

    • iain

      Would you think asking an agent to get him a deal on better terms without the input of your current club, in breach of football regulations and your contract would be worthy of dismissal?

      It’s just that this part seems to be left out quite often when the “he was only taken in by Tommy” rhetoric is rolled out.

      • JimBhoy

        Would chico have seen the funny side of the Hoax if Sandonkey was scoring a goal a game or had a sale value of £500k ?

        • iain

          I’m sure mr Green would have decided not to sack him if he was doing well and/or had a re-sale value.
          That he isn’t is really Sandaza’s hard luck.

          • JimBhoy

            Maybe Chico’s plan is to get rid of those who chose the playing staff, starting with the scout, wonder who could be next? Chico could handle the manager’s job as well I am sure..

      • Budweiser


        Would you be good enough to clarify which football regs were breached. Not a trick question – I genuinely don’t know.

        • iain

          Players under contract and not in the last six months of their deal are not permitted to try to strike deals with other clubs without the knowledge and permission of their own club

          • Budweiser

            Thanks for that.

          • JohnBhoy

            Hi iain,

            I haven’t read a full transcript of the conversation between Sandaza and Tommy. Was a deal struck? That is, an agreement w.r.t. terms and conditions eg salary, date of commencement, club etc? If there was no agreement with another club then there was no breach of football regs, unless the regs also bar communication with other parties to seek alternative employment when outwith the last 6 months of a contract. That said, such a policy is clearly open to challenge under EU legislation.

            The more I look at this case, even with the scant information available, the more I foresee serious implications for football. Another Bosman-type ruling may be in the pipeline.

            • JohnBhoy, that is a good point! As the call is accepted to be fake in nature, a fact that Sevco cannot deny due to their previous contact with Tommy, then it follows that Sandaza’s response must be considered in the same light. Hypothetically saying something, is not a breach of rules! Sandaza is being treated abysmally by Sevco! This guy actually praised the club and fans on the tape, and to be treated in this fashion is sickening. I have every support for Sandaza and hope he moves to a higher level and rubs Green nose in it….But not before he reaches a successful outcome at tribunal.

          • Ian403

            Iain, you are scraping the bottom of the barrel here.
            He never ASKED an Agent to get him another Club, He NEVER asked an AGENT to get him a better deal. He NEVER had a discussion with ANOTHER CLUB.

            He was taken in by a hoax call & disclosed his Personal details, he did not defame The CEO, Management nor the Club. In fact he only disparaged the weather & the Low League his Club were playing in.

            I fail to see the offence which warrants dismissal to be honest..

      • ecojon


        Yes well breach of football regulations truly is a most serious offence 🙂

  13. Paul

    Maybe the savings will pay the £50.000. Not really Sevco don’t do paying.I think Sandazza was very predicable and Sevco do not really care just like their fans who do not care about all the wee businesses they left in credit, as long as the institution is left intact. Notice the difference with Sevco fans and North Korea, no neither did I they are both run by a dictator and millions of brainwashed servants.

  14. duplesis

    He doesn’t have the right to make a standard unfair dismissal claim for the reason given above – he doesn’t have the required qualifying period of service.He doesn’t have 1 year, let alone 2.

    He does not have the general right not to be unfairly dismissed without this qualifying period, although he does have the right not to be wrongfully dismissed – i.e. dismissed in breach of contract.

    There are specific statutory exceptions to the need for this qualifying period, but none of them would seem to me to apply in Sandaza’s case (they tend to be in relation to dismissals for asserting a statutory right such as say paternity leave etc, and none of them seem apt here.)

    The real issue would boil down to wrongful dismissal, I suspect, and whether Sandaza ought to have been dismissed without notice – i.e. whether this was gross misconduct, which justifies dismissal without notice, or just misconduct, which does not.

    Whether or not that is a particularly valuable claim would depend on what his contract says about the notice period – if it provides that the notice period is the entire remainder of the contract the obviously that would be a substantial claim, but if there’s only a 2 or 3 month period of notice provided for, not so much.

    • ecojon


      I think the apparent rarity of the circumstances would make it an interesting legal minefield. Our problem as outsiders is that we don’t have vital info like his contract. I also don’t know what editing, if any, was done by Tommy.

      Obviously if there was any ‘cutting’ it might throw some light on the conversation and Sandaza’s state of mind or intentions and as I have never heard him talking I don’t know what kind of grasp of English he has.

      At the end of the day I don’t think this will be picked-over in public and I have no doubt that an acceptable settlement will be reached a bit further down the line as there could be skeletons that Rangers don’t rattled out in the open.

      But few will believe that if Sandaza had been scoring then all he would have received was a rap across the knuckles so in that sense he is more a victim of Ally’s increasingly woeful managerial skills than his own stupidity.

    • JohnBhoy

      Hi duplesis,

      Wrongful dismissal is a strong contender for a number of reasons. Football players are normally on fixed-term contracts. Premature termination of that contract by an employer can result in a claim for wrongful dismissal. Secondly, if the disciplinary process did not follow that incorporated in Sandaza’s contract then, once again, wrongful dismissal is an option open to Sandaza. Thirdly, failure to honour the agreed notice period is the more common complaint for wrongful dismissal (if there is no agreement to the contrary in his contract then, given his length of service, Sandaza would have been entitled to one week’s notice).

      Of course, Sandaza’s employer will argue that dismissal was reasonable in light of Sandaza’s alleged misconduct. If it goes the distance then this could end up via common law remedies rather than employment law. Depending on the facts of his case, Sandaza may be able to pursue a claim in a civil court (for wrongful dismissal) and a claim in an employment tribunal (for unfair dismissal).

  15. JimBhoy

    I actually feel sorry for the player and agree with an earlier poster that the timing was spot on for Chico to swing the axe… I realy thought we would have another ‘leaving by mutual consent’ thing going down here but that could cost a good few hundred K.

    However with £20m in the bank, new SB money coming, new sponsor deal and shirt, naming rights, another orange shirt coming, 7% of the world’s population wanting a piece of rangers and all the new revenue streams about to saturate the rangers bank account I would have thought chico might have put his big ‘ands in his big pockets and slung Sandonkey some spare change and not to bring that negative attention to the club…. Then again it seems that all publicity is good with Chico as he is beyond reproach…

    I hope big Sandonkey gets his move to the MLS and scores 100 goals a season and gives chico a one fingered goodbye…

    With the AXE treatment being meted out and more to come no doubt I wonder how that will affect Sally (or new manager) attracting new players.. Big Jon Daly will be knocking on wee Jackie’s door this morning imo..

    Sally (or new manager) will need to let go some of the guys who will be 22 or over come Jan 1st, so for working their way thru the ranks, sticking with the club in their darkest hours and eventually winning the league they could be disposed of to bring in some more senior players.. That’s what I find galling… Chico will sell anyone of any value that’s for sure, if Everton offered £1,2m for Wallace he’d be on his way, £250k for Templeton, he’d bite the hand off ya… Go see what he did the last time he was at a football club… Charles Green he sold the team…!!

    This season for rangers was the prelim, next season will be the big test and I can honestly see them only attract those mercenaries unwanted elsewhere just looking to top up their pension… Even the likes of Kenny Miller, Boyd, McFadden etc would be thinking twice surely…

  16. stevensanph

    Surprised there has been no mention of the St.Johnstone duo George OBoyle and Kevin Thomas who were dismissed from Saints for recreational drug use at a xmas party.

    The case went through the spl, sfa and finally an employment tribunal before Saints finally won.

    With FranSan i could see this going on for a while. The guy wants money. While at Saints he was very vocal that we were a stepping stone to put himself in the shop window. Rumors were Saints had offered him 4k/week to stay, which would have seen him become our highest ever paid player. He rejected this for a big money pay packet.

  17. Geddy Lee.


    Not only did Green sell the team, he did it without consulting the manager. LOL

    As for Sandanza, I suppose it all boils down to the terms of his contract. I can’t believe a club, even one as incompitent as “The rangers” have sacked him without being sure there can be no comeback.

    Do “the rangers” have a legal team , or are they still just faxing documents to Donald Findlay for his “opinion”?

    Pity Distefano has been brought to book. What a legal dream team that pair would have made. LOL

    • JimBhoy

      @Geddy Lee As it could take a long time to get thru the courts do you think Chico will care as he will be on a beach at that point…

  18. Raymilland


    A humorous or malicious deception.
    Deceive with a hoax.
    noun. fraud – trick – deception – deceit – spoof
    verb. cheat – swindle – bamboozle – deceive – fool – spoof
    Web definitions
    a defense that claims the defendant would not have broken the law if not tricked into doing it by law enforcement officials.

    Not guilty of a crime or offense.
    An innocent person, in particular.
    guiltless – harmless – naive – guileless – ingenuous

    A cruel and oppressive ruler.
    A person exercising power or control in a cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary way.
    despot – oppressor

    Not conforming to, permitted by, or recognized by law or rules.
    illegal – illicit – illegitimate – lawless – wrongful

  19. Dave S.

    The SFL rule (no. 127) says:
    No club shall terminate a player’s contract or agreement with the club during the term of the contract or agreement … unless the player is guilty of serious misconduct or a serious breach of the disciplinary Rules of the club ….’

    Note ‘serious’ rather than ‘gross’. Don’t know if it makes a difference, but if he has to appeal to the SFL, he may have less chance of success than if he was eligible to appeal to an ET. Depends what the SFL understands as serous.

  20. Paul

    I love the sevco, first Murray is duped, secondly Sandazza is duped thirdly Ally and Green dupe the fans into watching 3rd division crap. Whole lotta duping down ibrox way. Ha Ha loving it.

  21. abrahamtoast

    Is it not possible that Sandaza was quite happy to be “sacked”? In the circumstances, surely that is better for him than getting a slapped wrist and being held to the rest of his contract. Now he is free to negotiate himself a new contract somewhere else, and probably get a better signing-on fee.

    It could have been phrased better by the tribute act, but claiming he was sacked takes the focus away from Green’s apparent cost-cutting. Following Kyle, Murray, and Yeates, he is certainly cutting back on the wage bill. (Did the stadium manager go too, or did I dream that?)

    Bottom line, does anyone believe Sandaza would have been sacked if he had scored twenty goals this season?

  22. JimBhoy

    Real question is….. Who’s next ? I’d laugh my legs off if he sacked Jabba… 🙂

  23. Geddy Lee.

    Don’t forget the head physio. Despite years of service, he was recently given the shove.

    Apparently it was “completely out of the blue”.

    Clearly, Green feels that paying scouts is a “Waste of good brass” especially when all your interested in is free transfers, and out of contract has-beens.

    Physios? Don’t be such a big girl, eh Charles?

    They might not do “walking away” but they are excelling in “Pushing out the door”.

    Clearly, Green does not think sacking players will put off the kind of players (desperate) he is looking to attract.

    He wasn’t lying was he when he boasted “I know nowt about football”

    Amazing behaviour, and I’m sure there’s much much more entertainment still to be had from these clowns. LOL

  24. Regilives

    I think the important thing here is timing.

    I firmly believe SEVCO will settle with Sandaza financially, but this will be funded by income from the next tranche of ST money. The important thing for Green is to save money NOW, although whether for the good of the Club or his bonus is his primary motivation, who knows.

  25. It is clear, that a relationship has developed between Tommy, and the suits at Ibrokes, who have willingly engaged in banter with Tommy, with full knowledge of Tommy’s game plan. Did they warn their staff, that they also may be subject to possible hoax calls?
    If a link can be found that Tommy was given Sandaza’s number by someone, anyone within Ibrokes …….I suggest Sandaza would have a very good case!
    Coupled with the revelation that he was advised against blessing himself, and corroborating evidence of Sevcos recent cost cutting measures. I suggest he would have a very strong case indeed!
    It should be remembered that Sandaza has a young family to care for, and his only mistake was one of naivety. I feel he has been ruthlessly stitched up by Sevco, and I hope Tommy can show that the number was given by somebody in employ at Ibrokes.
    Then it will backfire big style

    • JimBhoy

      @Barca Wonder if Tommy has been given Sally’s number?? 🙂

    • Budweiser


      Watched the clip at the time and thought it was really funny. Also, being naive, thought it was of the ‘ one is as bad as the other variety’.Don’t remember ANY comedy clips about ANY football team ,other than Rangers in this respect. Isn’t it great to see that Charles Green has moved them all forward in this respect?
      Is there any truth to the rumour that part of chico’s redevelopment plans for Ibrox , include a new restaurant/ casino complex named ‘ La Bigoutrie ‘ ?.

      • Budweiser,
        I still find it funny, but sadly the Sandaza incident has given it a sinister edge. Not that I think that he was sacked because he was a “Brendan”. More in the underhand and extreme nature of the sacking to save money.The parallels are the same!
        I think the restaurant will be called La Blanc Provocoteur.

  26. JimBhoy

    Wee bit off course with this one but was surprised when i heard this in the news last night…

    Seems we can use TV evidence now when it is not in the ref’s report…. OR where it involves Lennie… I am sure I saw Jackie McNamara and Lomas exchange similar pleasantries on Monday nightm
    , caught on camera.. I wonder how much of this is actually down to Lennie’s summary of the ref’s performance. One could argue we lost 2 points due to an SPL/SFA appointed official, they have acknowledged it was no penalty and it was simulation for the pen… Yet in a sport that is high on adrenalin and passion, a grown man cannot swear. FFS..!!

    • Did the SFA take any action regarding the Sevconianchoir singers live on ESPN JimBhoy, I haven’t seen any reports of any.

    • ecojon

      @Jim Bhoy

      It would appear that offensive singing at Berwick captured on TV isn’t good enough evidence for Lunny.

    • Budweiser


      Looked at the’ incident’ on stv. Two players going for a ball, shoulder to shoulder – goodwin comes off slightly better and kayal skids off into the ad boards. Ok, nothing much there one would assume, but ‘lenny’ goes off on one ! The’ repetetive foul and abusive language ‘ was all bleeped out.
      However, on a Saints site I can excusively reveal lenny’s alleged comments.
      NL;- Aye Jim, think you’re an f***ing hard man?– You’re a f***ing fanny – hear me ! a f***cking fanny.
      Goodwin was also stated as saying ‘ it’s a good job the mikes didn’t hear my replies !’ He also stated that it was no big deal and just banter! Imo Jim Goodwin is one of the few honest and fair [ and hard when needed ] players in the SPL.- Just like NL when he was playing!
      Neil has ‘calmed doon’ in recent months and in my opinion has been better for himself and celtic for it.
      Sunday’s episode showed an amateurism, and lack of professionalism in NL. Would you like to have your sons or daughters, grandkids, listen to that level of vitriol [ from both parties] ? Or do you consider it to be ‘ just part of the game’ that we are trying to bring a ‘ family atmosphere to?

      • Budweiser


        I did note that a SKY mic was ‘ accidentally ‘ left at the foot of the ‘ celtic dugout’ and none at the Saints one – wonder why?

  27. Budweiser

    Off topic.
    P mac G on restructuring talks. – Save Sevco – lol.

  28. gortnamona

    ” If Sevco are in a cash flow crisis then, just like Rangers before them, that is their own doing. They are paying too many players too much in wages.
    Queen of the South have just romped SFL2 with a football budget of £300,000……..
    So the new outfit is hopelessly bloated and top heavy for the league they are playing in.”
    Phil Mac

    Simple common sense economics

    • Budweiser


      Sanda earning approx £224,000 pa. QOS ENTIRE football wages £300’000 pa. No wonder chico was at Saints on saturday! He must have been astonished at Saints drawing with the current [ and this seasons] SPL champions [ aswell as last 16 in champions league]. All at a fraction of his outlay at Ibrox! The difference of course is the two managers – surely even chico could see that! I fear that sally is not long for the chop – lamb chop of course! Surely Danny Lennon wouldn’t even consider going there.

  29. Geddy Lee.

    Condolences to poor Coisty as his young son is fined for drunken abuse of 2 police officers.

    Just turned 18 and apparently already a lush.

    He recieved a £20,000 car from his father, so really should try and keep off the booze.

    ps Bears Den “thread of the day” is entitled “Illegal government funding”…

    This concerns the apparent corrupt refurbishing of the East end of Glasgow prior to the Commenwealth Games.

    Sevcovia is raging at this illegal move, designed to aid the Cafflicks living in the area ( I’m serious!!!).

    They actually think the East End is only populated by immigrants and that no Protestants live there.

    Check it out. It’s magical stuff, and another fascinating window into the Ibrox mindset.

    • Geddy Lee, The sad thing is, they don’t have a mind set until they are told to have one!
      I was reading there last night when the Sandaza sacking was just a rumour. It was the usual “Timmy trouble making” and “Rangers(Sevco) widnae dae that” and in fighting stuff.
      Then when Sevco officially announced his sacking, it was like somebody flicked a switch, and the poor guy(Sandaza) got dogs abuse!
      I am of the opposite view to the SFA on this(No surprise!) Agreed they have a large support and the game needs more bums on seats, but not these bums! I would actually hit them with lifetime banning orders, for the better good of the game!

    • FairBairn

      Leave the family alone, please.

  30. Raymilland

    Joe & Petunia already have their TRFC share certificate framed and mounted.

  31. Fra

    Dress it up however they like but it’s plainly obvious Sevco are haemorrhaging cash at an alarming rate and are in serious financial strife. Call it restructuring or anything you want to call it but it looks pretty obvious to me. The team from Ibrox are a busted flush and the clock is ticking on their existence. I for one, will not be disappointed to see them die again and if that happens, then there’s no way back.


  32. JimBhoy

    Chris Hegarty gets a ban for stamping on an opponent could he be next? He is 21 this year…??

    • JohnBhoy

      Hi JimBhoy

      Charlie has opened a can of worms by using the law of the land to sack Sandaza. Kicking an employee of another company, in public at that and caught on camera, is a clear case of gross misconduct. We can now expect Chris Hegarty to be the subject of a disciplinary hearing. Who’s next? Sally sacked on capability grounds? Fans expecting to watch a football team and now claiming they were sold a pup in breach of their consumer rights? Where will this all end?

  33. Monti

    Graffiti on the wall it says,tick tock,tick tock Graffiti on the wall,Graffiti on the wall pmsl haha eeeee aaa……lol

  34. Monti

    “who are these people” who do you mean Ally? ” the people that are all covered in asbestos” look there’s dust everywhere…….

    • Who are these people montit ?……. we arra peeeeeeeeeeepppeeellllllllll…!

      • Do you think Sandaza, after the praise he gave of Rangers is being treated fairly, or do you think he is a victim of circumstances which has seen so many departures? Are you aware of Greens actions at Sheff Utd, and why he is so reviled there? Are you too dumb to offer a proper comment or opinion on this issue affecting your Fuhrers masterplan for global domination?

  35. Fra

    Cars on sale…..How does it feel to have everything you’ve ever worshipped collapse before your very eyes.

    • On the contrary dear bhoy , I’m totally relaxed about the whole situation , if everything’s ok why reconstruct the leagues ? What’s the rush ? Why panic ? Why is liewell pushing for reconstruction ? Surely the espeehell isn’t skint , or has sky threatened to pull the plug , or the prospect of no sponsorship , the mighty Rangers will go from strength to strength , but will the rest ? So I’ll ask you again what’s the rush ?….btw about that orlit winding up order any news Mick ?

      • JimBhoy

        You have been reading old sticklebricks site way too much… You make it sound like the Celtic minded are pushing for a league rejig, why would that be when Celtic will be the most financially impacted… The only geezer panicing is Longmuir (surrounded by rangers fans in his family, the good guy) the man whose underlying plan to get rangers fast-tracked has been exposed a few times already… This SPL 2 thing is infighting of the 3 numpties and I am sure all non rangers fans will make their feelings known on that one… There will be hee-haw reconstruction the season coming I guarantee that cos the 3 at the top couldn’t agree that night follows day..

        Regards the burst baw league being skint or the SKY deal read what Phil posted..He presents facts and has been a step ahead for years on the various rangers tragedies and more.

        I think Celtic could survive without the £2m it gets from SKY, the best thing for Celtic would be to be able to broker their own deals for media rights..

        Regards orlit who gives a fuk…. Have you heard any closure from Chico/Jabba? There will be plenty more large bills exposed where your mighty club struggle to pay, mark my words.

        Only the delusional could make the statement that ‘rangers will go from strength to strength’, please present your skewed logic or evidence of this? All the evidence I see smacks of short-termism, robbing peter to pay paul until the man in charge can make a safe exit with a barrow load of cash leaving Sevconia in any sh!t state, ‘cos he doesn’t care…

        I have no idea what he would need to do for you boys to open your eyes to what is unfolding in front of you..As he starts to believe in his own God like untouchable status his behaviour will become even more bizarre, looking forward to even more fun from Chico… When Sally is moved to man the phone lines I wonder how long Watty will stick around…

        The big hoos is crumbling and that’s no reference to asbestos… But anyways believe what you like…Adds to the fun.. 🙂

        OK time to go for a jog wi the dog before our game tonight..

      • tom

        carse, there are not enough d’s for you, you fuddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd.

      • Fra

        3season tickets. You must have money to burn. Hahaha

    • More like cars on bricks Fra lol.

  36. The bottom line bhoys is the mighty Rangers are the cash cow of Scottish fitba ! And the diddy teams are flapping like budgies , you’ll notice the bears are quite happy to go through the leagues ? No panic , no flapping just getting on with the job , the rest ? Well you can see for yourselves , they even need the mighty Rangers to pay their lawyers .chin chin .

    • JohnBhoy

      Hi carson,

      Cash cow? More like white elephant.

    • Fra

      Just when it all seemed rosy, Chuckles hadn’t spouted nonsense for a few days and that elusive hard earned title was in the bag, up pops agent Fran then closely following on his heels is Craigy Bhoy (aka agent Whyte).

      Never have I had so much fun. Sevco 5088 to Sevco Scotland has been hung out there for all to see. Chuckles cheated agent Whyte and he’s not a happy bunny. It is becoming clearer by the day that Chuckles is certainly a snake oil salesman. Two ferrets in a sack come to mind and we get to gloat. I’m loving every darned minute of this pantomime.

      Moonbeams Murray has a lot to answer for. Every one a spiv. You couldn’t give them a red neck with a blow torch. Murray to Whyte to Green. The three desperadoes. Keep it coming folks.

    • tom

      aye, where’s the cash, but?

    • hancock

      they wont pay the lawyers ….. just like they don’t pay tax’s

  37. Monti

    I’ve just said to my gaffer ‘ how would you react if another company wanted my services?’….he said ” Mont we would encourage you to take their offer”…cheeky foker,……fk him, get Tommy on the line…..pmsl

    • Are burgerking recruiting ?… go for it montit see it as promotion from cleaning wheelie bins …good for you .

      • Monti

        Still haven’t answered the asbestos question Arse-on? Is that because you know the answer? Sevco have NO money!!!!! Just like the DEAD,ROTTEN,STINKING CARCAS Rangers (IL), begged,borrowed & cheated your way to tainted trophies & like all cheats,you know deep down the medals are worthless & stained!!! Your dead club will be forever remembered as the CHEATING club, The TAX EVADING club,the SECTARIAN club!!! SCOTLAND’S SHAME! P.S. Anyway how much does it cost to rid a stadium of asbestos arse-on? Chuckles says he has £22m in the bank? Well The The Sevco can’t get a credit line,so who’s a count is it in? Chuckles first dibs? Tick tock tick tock bye bye…….

    • david

      Another probable lie.
      Too dumb to have a job, and way too bigoted by his own admission.

      • Monti

        Ah there you are the truth doctor.. ..

      • Monti

        David have you EVER came on here & actually entered the debate with the intention to have a conversation, all mature like? You either can’t or just need a little help with the spelling? If it’s help you need,it’s there. Short,silly & bitter comments are unnecessary & you won’t hear any of that from me…..grow up & join in, it’s great fun, it doesn’t need to be bitter like your trying to make it,why are you bitter? Is it because your team is dead?……come on now,join in with the Papal!

        • david

          I have posted plenty on issues which are way above your head, liar boy.
          My team is NOT dead , it is doing rather well ( and its NOT in the bottom tier ).
          Your posts have on occasion been a disgrace, and all your lies have reduced you to a laughing stock.

      • JohnBhoy

        David, what is your evidence that Monti is “bigoted”. Celebrating one religion, whether Protestant or Catholic, does not constitute discriminatory behaviour.

  38. Raymilland

    Rangers v Scots Division Three

    Rangers’ most expensive season ticket is £211 more expensive than nearest highest-price rivals Clyde and Peterhead.

    Rangers share the cost of the most expensive programme in the division with Stirling at £3.

    Queens Park have the most expensive pie (£2.20) and tea (£2.20), while Rangers’ cost £2 each.
    Rangers’ cheapest season ticket available costs £168 more than the cheapest at Montrose.

    Prices for Rangers 2012-13 season tickets start from £258 for adults, £65 for kids and £179 for concessions.

    Division 2 champions Queen of the South 2012-13 season tickets; £240 for adults, £18 for kids, £128 for OAP’s,
    £90 for students.

    Every club chairman faces the difficult choice of setting the season ticket price at a level to draw maximum sales while balancing the books. Charles Green is faced with the stark choice of grossly over charging season ticket holders year upon year.

    An alternative to the above would be to increase the cost of a pie to around £5 (likewise match programmes). Fans would have the choice whether to board such a gravy train.
    Another suggestion to encourage sale of such expensive meat pies would be to introduce a hidden golden ticket; a cash prize could then be awarded to the lucky finder. An apt title for the golden ticket contest could be ‘Charles Green’s Pie in the Sky lottery’.

    Then again, perhaps not, Charlie’s golden ticket is well and truly stashed away.

  39. First burley then hay then mulgrew and now Hartley ……we need the mighty Rangers ! ….oh how we will laugh when they come begging .

  40. JohnOh

    Paul, I was struck by this part of the Rangers statement, “The termination is subject to the right of appeal under SFL rules and there will be no further comment from Rangers on this issue.” Surely it is disingenuous to state “…under SFL rules…”, and to appear to distance the club from the requirement to have a right of appeal? Correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t the right to appeal an obligation under the laws of the land, not to mention natural justice? Regards, John

  41. Monti

    Just been reading up on asbestos removal guidelines, it recommends when removing asbestos materials & paintwork, you should consider removing concrete as well… in the context of a football stadium( albeit a crumbling second rate one), this to me says demolition of the stadium is a real possibility? Are there any asbestos experts on here who could confirm this? Totally pmsl! P.S. David & Arse- on…reading is for gaining knowledge…..just saying like….sniff.

  42. Hey MONTIT , do me favour could you get the correct attendance at breezblock towers on Saturday ? I will cut you a wee bit of slack and let you use your two hands infact you can use all your eight fingers and FOUR thumbs , now no cheating and doing what Mick does and includes , pigeons , midges and ra polis .

    • JimBhoy

      Go get your accounts audited, it’s a better financial health barometer than the empty seat scenario you have spouted for a few weeks ya muppet… Chico gonna have more in the bank than the celtic by season end, Really? Stalybridge celtic?

      Let’s see the season book take on by the rabid rangers, present some evidence to what i said above, pasted one more time below…..

      “Only the delusional could make the statement that ‘rangers will go from strength to strength’, please present your skewed logic or evidence of this? All the evidence I see smacks of short-termism, robbing peter to pay paul until the man in charge can make a safe exit with a barrow load of cash leaving Sevconia in any sh!t state, ‘cos he doesn’t care… ”

      Chico rocks… He WILL rock the rangers to the core trust me.. Karmatastic..!


    Looks like more bad news for thec Sevconians as another bunch of legal bills is thrown in their direction. Aw, shame!

    • SairFecht

      The axis of evil strikes again. Remember Charlie’s smug comment that he would have the players in question sitting out games during the process to claim compensation for losses to his assets? Well, he’s not sounding so chirpy now.

    • JimBhoy

      @Barca Earlier I wrote (in reply to Arseon) Regards orlit who gives a fuk…. Have you heard any closure from Chico/Jabba? There will be plenty more large bills exposed where your mighty club struggle to pay, mark my words.

      JimBhoy sets the JuJu sign on the rabid rangers.. Offishal..! 😉

      • JimBhoy, From what I gather re Orlit, the payments were to be staged. I imagine any discrepancy between what is owed will not arise until the final payment date.+ grace period.
        If Chicco has settled, then I suspect we will hear no more of it. It looks like Orlits warning shot across the bows, had the desired affect though, and Chicco shat a bricco.
        Whether it will show up when the audited accounts submitted is another matter. I have doubts if Sevco should be responsible for the repayment. as it was from a period prior to their conception.

  44. Raymilland

    News that Mr Green, who lives in the South Yorkshire mining village of Goldthorpe, had tabled a bid for the beleaguered Ibrox side has sparked ominous warnings from former business associates and Sheffield United fans.

    One former colleague, speaking to The Herald’s sister paper, the Evening Times, on condition of anonymity, said simply: “Don’t let that man anywhere near Rangers or football.”

    Records held by Companies House reveal that nine of the companies Mr Green has been involved with in the past have been dissolved, while he has a track record of moving very quickly between posts, having resigned a total of 31 different appointments during his career.

    Among Sheffield United fans, he is remembered as a “hatchet man” who sold off some of the club’s most valuable players before resigning as chief executive in 1998 amid outrage from supporters.

    His stint at Bramall Lane saw United listed on the stock exchange in 1997 to raise funds, but just months later top strikers Brian Deane and Jan Aage Fjortoft were sold off, closely followed by Scottish midfielder Don Hutchison.
    The loss of key players eventually culminated in the resignation of manager Nigel Spackman, with fans blaming Mr Green for the side’s failure to achieve promotion into the English Premiership.

    United message boards buzzed with dire warnings for Rangers fans should Mr Green take the helm at Ibrox, with one fan writing: “As if things couldn’t get any worse, up pops Charles Green”, while another noted simply that his short tenure left their club “in a mess”.

    • JimBhoy

      @Ray read my post 3 back… The rangers fans are in a trance following the pied piper of Ibrox mate.. I really thought a few months back they would have told Chico to fek off, but who can blame them no-one else wanted them.. Well except Wattie who waited til the 13th Hour to throw in some unfounded vague bid.. Chico last chance saloon, to all fans outwith rangers supporters is an obvious chancer, for backing him they deserve the clusterfuk they are in now and the sh!t storm that will come.. Carson will be an Airdrie supporter soon… KKK,

      • JimBhoy, Rangers were running at a £1m per month deficit prior to D&P taking over in admin.
        To date they are still running a similar deficit. This has been puzzling me, as their wage bill has been slashed considerably since then.
        If you remember, Chicco made no bones of the fact that the “saviour cash” was merely a loan. I wonder if the monthly loss is caused by the servicing of this “internal debt”.(i.e. chicco’s cronies investment).
        I imagine an ideal scenario would see that internal debt resolved prior to, or at least within the share lock in period. That would create a situation whereby the initial investment+interest would be non toxic, and the shares as profit, in their entirety.
        Free to sell when the market or situation dictates.

        • tykebhoy

          The wage bill may have been slashed but so has the income. Season books sold at a much reduced price, no Euro money, very little if any tv money (Associate members of the SFL have no call to monies for media rights)……….

          There may have been some internal debt repayment (we know of one short term loan at very favourable interest rates to the lender), and the executive officers are probably on a bigger wedge than pre Valentines day 2012 but I suspect the majority of the initial investors have been paid back in shares that they paid almost sfa for and will need to offload soon after their lockin ends to make a return on investment

  45. This must surely cast doubt on the due diligence process conducted by the SFA. Do they even have the foggiest idea who they have granted a license to?
    Craig Whyte has a lifetime ban from involvement in any form within Scottish football.
    Until this matter is resolved, how can they possibly justify the continued existance of Sevco within the game.
    I suggest that pending the outcome of this, proof of ownership, the only sensible action the SFA can take is immediate suspension of Sevco’s playing license.

  46. Cue howls of outrage from the Moral Righteousness Brigade & calls for the hoaxer to be prosecuted/hounded out/hung drawn & quartered etc etc, just like the Aussie DJs were over their prank call.

    Many of those screaming this blood-lust will conveniently forget that they used to have a laugh at the “marks” on Candid Camera/Beadle’s About (delete as appropriate by age.)

    Chuckles definitely appears to be having something of a clearout, by fair means or (possibly) foul. Can’t be doing much for employee relations; Sally must be bricking it!

  47. Paul
    In light of the latest scoop in The Sun which Mick pre-empted, and is owed grovelling apologies for from Carson and the disfunctional deserter Cam, I think you have a busy time ahead.
    Will Sandaza now have to take CW to tribunial?
    Will the Sevco team have to T.U.P.E. again?
    Was the share issue legal, and did the Sevconians, by investing, make CW , the slayer of their club, very very rich? (Hope so!)
    Will Sevco suffer a 3-0 defeat if CW is involved?
    Who have the SFA granted license to, RIFC, Sevco, under CG, Sevco 5088 under CW, or Campbell Ogilvie under arrest?
    Will this gift ever stop giving?
    Given that Tesco do not want the asbestos dome and demolition costs, should Ibrox just have bars put on the windows.? Then the big hoose can stay shut! With all the crims trapped safely inside.
    Should the SFA,, SPL, SFL,
    be invited to join them where they can undertake rehabilitation courses on how to conduct due diligence tests.
    Will the streets of Scotland be awash with Ferarri driving lawyers with enough money to buy a football team toy, thus saving our game?
    Will LNS deem the CW tapes a sporting advantage? Who”s side will Jabba be on, will he take what’s on the table now, or play the long game and claim he was DEEP, under cover, as the country’s leading investigative reporter?
    Could a mutual settlement be agreed involving a civil ceremony between CW & CG, and they can honeymoon together in style on the share proceeds on an private Carribean island. Leaving Ibrox to the ravages of time and mother nature and Sevconians nothing to do on a Saturday? Awww, I love a happy ending!

  48. Ed Paisley

    I read that when Charles was brought to Sheffield United by Mike McDonald, He overspent on dubious quality players and has-beens and then when the expected financial return and adoration didn’t materialise he started flogging players without consulting the manager. Charles seems to be a man of big plans until fiscal realities hit home and then he panics. This is a personality type well know to experts in the field of psychopathology: “a moonbeams merchant”, but fortunately his victims tend to be people with hypergullibility syndrome and they are rare outside Govan.

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