Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

I'm quite chilled out about the stripping of titles. I don't really see what is to be gained by going back in time and taking them away.

All of the titles gained during that period are tainted in my eyes, so every boast a Rangers fan makes, ever, about the numbers of titles they have won or how many stars they have on their shirts will forever be tainted.

It didn't need to be this way for them. They could have volunteered to hand back their dodgy titles. That would have left them with the sizeable number of trophies they had won previously and then all of the ones they will win in future completely unquestionable. And investigations could be made into the trophies won by other clubs that the whataboutery loving Rangers fans - correctly - point out should also be scrapped.

The past 16 years or so will go down as one of the most shameful in Scottish football history. We haven't qualified for a major international competition and a large number of our domestic trophies have been affected by financial doping whilst our limp authorities dithered about what to do about them.

I agree with aspects of the Rangers statement yesterday. The worst thing for Scottish football to do now would be to bicker for the next 5 years about what titles should be taken away, and we SHOULD all move on. But there was not a shred of remorse in that statement and for that reason we cannot move on. There is nothing remorseful or even remotely self-aware about a club 5 points clear at the top of the league and with 4x the wage budget of their nearest challengers that needs £2.5 million extra external funding to finish the season.

Rangers remain the biggest problem in Scottish football and probably always will be.

And Sevco remain skint. Still no sign of over investment. [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steakbake

Not seen anything that indicates the SFA are moving on this at all - which is unsurprising as the guy at the top is the same one who was in the room when the tax/sport cheating plan was put into place.

Ogilvie has to go.

Wonder what the HFC official position is on this?

Have to say that Clumpany was bang on: oh for a Turnbull Hutton character to step forward and represent the views publicly of the many fans who have seen the last 10+ years as a charade of a competition. Somehow, I feel the blazers will close ranks and the calls for action will be left for people on the internet, whose view of this will be written off as them having an agenda or simply that they're obsessed.

---

Listening to the rumours and reading between the lines of what happened last time this was visited, the SPL with Aberdeen, ourselves, Celtic and Dundee United to the fore, thought that getting the LNS commission set up would do the business and the Old Huns' honours won during the EBT era would be stripped. However, they didn't reckon with the wily ways of the SFA, including actual guilty Hun Ogilvie and arch-Hun appeaser Regan who effectively neutered the whole thing by severely limiting the terms of reference and providing an extremely pro-Hun interpretation of their rules and registration procedures to LNS. :rolleyes:

Basically the whole thing was a stitch up to ward off the Hun lynch mob. It seems that the main device they used to do the stitching, the perceived legality of EBTs, may also be the device that unpicks the whole thing in light of the new Court of Session judgement. :na na:

But we need the SPL clubs to have the balls to go for a rematch. That's going to be greatly helped if we can find a way to express our support for it publically. Any ideas, anyone?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smartie

I'm quite chilled out about the stripping of titles. I don't really see what is to be gained by going back in time and taking them away.

All of the titles gained during that period are tainted in my eyes, so every boast a Rangers fan makes, ever, about the numbers of titles they have won or how many stars they have on their shirts will forever be tainted.

It didn't need to be this way for them. They could have volunteered to hand back their dodgy titles. That would have left them with the sizeable number of trophies they had won previously and then all of the ones they will win in future completely unquestionable. And investigations could be made into the trophies won by other clubs that the whataboutery loving Rangers fans - correctly - point out should also be scrapped.

The past 16 years or so will go down as one of the most shameful in Scottish football history. We haven't qualified for a major international competition and a large number of our domestic trophies have been affected by financial doping whilst our limp authorities dithered about what to do about them.

I agree with aspects of the Rangers statement yesterday. The worst thing for Scottish football to do now would be to bicker for the next 5 years about what titles should be taken away, and we SHOULD all move on. But there was not a shred of remorse in that statement and for that reason we cannot move on. There is nothing remorseful or even remotely self-aware about a club 5 points clear at the top of the league and with 4x the wage budget of their nearest challengers that needs £2.5 million extra external funding to finish the season.

Rangers remain the biggest problem in Scottish football an probably always will be.

---

Personally I couldn't care less whether they're remorseful, contrite, humble, angry, defiant or whatever. I just want the rules applied as if it was any other club. Doesn't seem too much to ask?

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/1..._club_affairs/


Rangers board proposing a motion to strip Ashley of his voting rights at their AGM.

Come on Mike, take them to court again, High court in London of course with plenty very expensive legal high rollers to pay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

Personally I couldn't care less whether they're remorseful, contrite, humble, angry, defiant or whatever. I just want the rules applied as if it was any other club. Doesn't seem too much to ask?

---

So what are the rules on retrospectively removing titles for financial doping in Scottish football?

Rangers will probably be able to point at a flimsy SFA/SPL/SPFL rule book and claim - because of the flimsiness of these rules with some justification - that they "did nothing wrong" or "were punished enough". We can then spend the next 10 years paying lawyers to sort out in legal terms whether or not this is the case.

I'd prefer for us to get a watertight set of rules in place that ALL of the clubs understand, accept and respect without trying every trick in the book to get round them. And if there was evidence of contrition from Rangers then I'd be happy to work towards that. Instead they are their moronic, belligerent old selves and that will lead to constant aggro with Scottish football constantly arguing about past indiscretions instead of everyone working together towards a better future.

I just want a fair playing field where everyone knows the rules and the best team wins.

We need to move on - their attitude will stop us from doing so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/1..._club_affairs/


Rangers board proposing a motion to strip Ashley of his voting rights at their AGM.

Come on Mike, take them to court again, High court in London of course with plenty very expensive legal high rollers to pay.

---

Is this a deliberate New Hun strategy to get to admin but it be Ashley's "fault"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smartie

So what are the rules on retrospectively removing titles for financial doping in Scottish football?

Rangers will probably be able to point at a flimsy SFA/SPL/SPFL rule book and claim - because of the flimsiness of these rules with some justification - that they "did nothing wrong" or "were punished enough". We can then spend the next 10 years paying lawyers to sort out in legal terms whether or not this is the case.

I'd prefer for us to get a watertight set of rules in place that ALL of the clubs understand, accept and respect without trying every trick in the book to get round them. And if there was evidence of contrition from Rangers then I'd be happy to work towards that. Instead they are their moronic, belligerent old selves and that will lead to constant aggro with Scottish football constantly arguing about past indiscretions instead of everyone working together towards a better future.

I just want a fair playing field where everyone knows the rules and the best team wins.

We need to move on - their attitude will stop us from doing so.

---

Why do the football authorities need rules on the misuse of tax schemes when the courts reach a studied and legal conlusion of guilt or otherwise?

As for retrospective sanction or punishment or in the likely (non) punishment of the SFA or SPFL there are always areas of discretion they could use in any circumstance if they so wished or when it suits them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/1..._club_affairs/

Rangers board proposing a motion to strip Ashley of his voting rights at their AGM.
Come on Mike, take them to court again, High court in London of course with plenty very expensive legal high rollers to pay.

---

Old news.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Notice of Rangers AGM. According to Twitter, resolution 11 seeks to remove Ashley's voting rights.

https://t.co/hHCyQkbTNT

---

The SFA/SPFL rules say all players earnings and financial information have to be on their playing contracts or they are not properly registered.

Sevco have argued the EBTs were not wages but loans and did not have to be on the playing contracts.

Three high court judges have now said the EBT payments were wages.

Sevco now say its time to move on, we've all suffered enough. :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smartie

So what are the rules on retrospectively removing titles for financial doping in Scottish football?

Rangers will probably be able to point at a flimsy SFA/SPL/SPFL rule book and claim - because of the flimsiness of these rules with some justification - that they "did nothing wrong" or "were punished enough". We can then spend the next 10 years paying lawyers to sort out in legal terms whether or not this is the case.

I'd prefer for us to get a watertight set of rules in place that ALL of the clubs understand, accept and respect without trying every trick in the book to get round them. And if there was evidence of contrition from Rangers then I'd be happy to work towards that. Instead they are their moronic, belligerent old selves and that will lead to constant aggro with Scottish football constantly arguing about past indiscretions instead of everyone working together towards a better future.

I just want a fair playing field where everyone knows the rules and the best team wins.

We need to move on - their attitude will stop us from doing so.

---

I take your point regarding the ambivalence of the rules but when wee clubs are thrown out of the cup for having a player's registration signed once rather than twice, it doesn't seem to be that big a stretch to assume that results should not be allowed to stand when a big club has been found guilty of actually wilfully breaking registration rules to secure an advantage.

It's practically impossible to retrospectively work out what would've happened had they been disqualified on day 1, but at the very least, those competitions they won while cheating should be expunged from the record books.

They might moan about it but if justice is seen to be done, we will all eventually move on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smartie

So what are the rules on retrospectively removing titles for financial doping in Scottish football?

Rangers will probably be able to point at a flimsy SFA/SPL/SPFL rule book and claim - because of the flimsiness of these rules with some justification - that they "did nothing wrong" or "were punished enough". We can then spend the next 10 years paying lawyers to sort out in legal terms whether or not this is the case.

I'd prefer for us to get a watertight set of rules in place that ALL of the clubs understand, accept and respect without trying every trick in the book to get round them. And if there was evidence of contrition from Rangers then I'd be happy to work towards that. Instead they are their moronic, belligerent old selves and that will lead to constant aggro with Scottish football constantly arguing about past indiscretions instead of everyone working together towards a better future.

I just want a fair playing field where everyone knows the rules and the best team wins.

We need to move on - their attitude will stop us from doing so.

---

As I said earlier,players earnings registered with the sfa at the time are now confirmed to be false(according to the courts)
This means these players were in eligible!
everything else is void of the argument,it really is that simple!
No drama,no discussion and no debate.
Rules have been PROVEN! To be broken and there is no way out.
All games these players played in will now be awarded to the other team 3-0.

The bloke who writes the waitingfortax blog is on Sportsound tonight. Currently on Twitter he is a Hun and a Fenian.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spike Mandela

Why do the football authorities need rules on the misuse of tax schemes when the courts reach a studied and legal conlusion of guilt or otherwise?

As for retrospective sanction or punishment or in the likely (non) punishment of the SFA or SPFL there are always areas of discretion they could use in any circumstance if they so wished or when it suits them.

---

I think they need to have rules on the misuse of tax schemes because clubs misuse tax schemes. This gives some teams an unfair advantage and some a disadvantage.

They need to clarify what this actually means within Scottish football, such as "any competitions found to have been won whilst a club operated a scheme found to be unlawful will be deleted from the record/ awarded to 2nd place in that competition" or whatever they choose to do.


I hate areas of discretion on matters like these. It is the abuse of discretion that has allowed this situation to develop, what with the cosy relationships enjoyed between the SFA and Rangers. Discretion is great if you have people with a shred of integrity but we're relying on people like Campbell Ogilvie FFS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Treadstone

The bloke who writes the waitingfortax blog is on Sportsound tonight. Currently on Twitter he is a Hun and a Fenian.

---

Guy who makes living defending tax avoidance suggests there might be a defence against this tax avoidance. Shockerooni!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Treadstone

The bloke who writes the waitingfortax blog is on Sportsound tonight. Currently on Twitter he is a Hun and a Fenian.

---

Oh good. That's all we need. Another Rangers apologist, only this time one who can string two words together and is completely aware of his own star qualities. "I’m a Queen’s Counsel specialising in the field of tax. Although that fact doesn’t make me right, it does make my view worth listening to."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Oh good. That's all we need. Another Rangers apologist, only this time one who can string two words together and is completely aware of his own star qualities. "I’m a Queen’s Counsel specialising in the field of tax. Although that fact doesn’t make me right, it does make my view worth listening to."

---

It's quite unbelievable how desperate the Beeb's sports dept are to whitewash the Huns' crimes. I get why the tabloids would do it given they are dependent on the Hun pound but a public broadcaster? Wtf?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

The SFA/SPFL rules say all players earnings and financial information have to be on their playing contracts or they are not properly registered.

Sevco have argued the EBTs were not wages but loans and did not have to be on the playing contracts.

Three high court judges have now said the EBT payments were wages.

Sevco now say its time to move on, we've all suffered enough. :greengrin

---

I think the penny has dropped for sevco:agree:
The facts are there now in black and white.
They will try and keep the key/main/real issue under the radar.
the players earned more than was registered,that is all that matters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

As the owner of a member of the SPFL and SFA, yep.

---

Pretty sure Sevco are the member and RIFC are the "owner"-

"Sevco Scotland Ltd was formed on 29 March 2012^[30] as a means for Charles Green to acquire the assets of Rangers FC. Sevco Scotland Ltd (subsequently renamed The Rangers Football Club Ltd) was formed to ensure that if the formation of a new company was required in the event of a CVA being rejected, then the Club's corporate entity would be a Scottish registered company as it has always been. When the CVA failed the assets of The Rangers Football Club Plc (subsequently renamed RFC 2012 plc) were then sold for £5.5 million.^[31][32][33]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ownership_of_Rangers_F.C.

Roger Mitchell is on sportsound and he's a jobby.

Or is he saying what the SFA SPL etc etc are thinking


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ekhibee

Roger Mitchell is on sportsound and he's a jobby.

---

The former chief executive of the SPL "cheating happens all over the world, move on". No wonder Scottish football is in dire straits.

Not one peep of any of this on Reporting Scotland tonight.

Sickening.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Treadstone

The former chief executive of the SPL "cheating happens all over the world, move on". No wonder Scottish football is in dire straits.

---

Guy txt the show stating he has paid money to watch matches that were rigged.
his reply was "there's all sorts happening all over the world""look what's happening in Russia":confused:
As for x players managers saying"games were won on the park fair and square"what about the punter who paid to see this,who without,there careers would never have happened?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Treadstone

The former chief executive of the SPL "cheating happens all over the world, move on". No wonder Scottish football is in dire straits.

---

Good point. He was a useless, ineffective little numpty when he was chief executive, and that says a lot about what I think of his opinions on the state of Scottish football.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Treadstone

The former chief executive of the SPL "cheating happens all over the world, move on". No wonder Scottish football is in dire straits.

---

So he admits it was cheating at least.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by portycabbage

Pretty sure Sevco are the member and RIFC are the "owner"-

"Sevco Scotland Ltd was formed on 29 March 2012^[30] as a means for Charles Green to acquire the assets of Rangers FC. Sevco Scotland Ltd (subsequently renamed The Rangers Football Club Ltd) was formed to ensure that if the formation of a new company was required in the event of a CVA being rejected, then the Club's corporate entity would be a Scottish registered company as it has always been. When the CVA failed the assets of The Rangers Football Club Plc (subsequently renamed RFC 2012 plc) were then sold for £5.5 million.^[31][32][33]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ownership_of_Rangers_F.C.

---

Rangers are the member club. Their owner is TRFC Ltd.

Ps that Wikipedia article is written by someone with an agenda [emoji6]

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ekhibee

Good point. He was a useless, ineffective little numpty when he was chief executive, and that says a lot about what I think of his opinions on the state of Scottish football.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kato

So he admits it was cheating at least.

---

So, everybody cheat, the world will be a better place for the best cheats at least. Way beyond tiny Scottish football but when it comes to defending the indefensible we definitely punch above our weight, makes you wonder about how many SFA snouts were in the FIF/EUFA trough that we are yet to hear about. Are we seeing defences being got in early?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Treadstone

The former chief executive of the SPL "cheating happens all over the world, move on". No wonder Scottish football is in dire straits.

---

David Farrell ‏@davidfarrellfaz 8m8 minutes ago

Roger Mitchell, the man who knocked back £40m from Sky in favour of a deal with Setanta and SPL TV!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibernia_inn

David Farrell ‏@davidfarrellfaz 8m8 minutes ago

Roger Mitchell, the man who knocked back £40m from Sky in favour of a deal with Setanta and SPL TV!

---

Is this the guy who cornered the market in Sinclair C5's with 8 track cassette players pre installed but was only willing to sell them to households who could prove they had Betamax Video players installed in every room?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bostonhibby

So, everybody cheat, the world will be a better place for the best cheats at least. Way beyond tiny Scottish football but when it comes to defending the indefensible we definitely punch above our weight, makes you wonder about how many SFA snouts were in the FIF/EUFA trough that we are yet to hear about. Are we seeing defences being got in early?

---

:agree: there are close parallels here with the Russian athletics doping scandal, which (amongst other things) has rendered the London 2012 Olympics a hollow mockery.

On any rational analysis, the cheating Russian athletes should be stripped of their medals and Russia should be banned from Rio 2016. But it won't happen because there are too many vested interests at stake. Even Lord Coe is equivocating.

The reality is that integrity no longer counts for anything in top-level sport.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ehf

:agree: there are close parallels here with the Russian athletics doping scandal, which (amongst other things) has rendered the London 2012 Olympics a hollow mockery.

On any rational analysis, the cheating Russian athletes should be stripped of their medals and Russia should be banned from Rio 2016. But it won't happen because there are too many vested interests at stake. Even Lord Coe is equivocating.

The reality is that integrity no longer counts for anything in top-level sport.

---

:agree: It's not as if Lord Coe, and the companies associated with him and the Olympic venture have anything to hide?:greengrin

JohnJames blogging again.


https://johnjamessite.wordpress.com/


Gives a pretty comprehensive description of how Rangers player's registration have been compromised by the omission of EBT details and why the SFA should find them improperly registered.

Exactly the same for the Yam Skacel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Rangers are the member club. Their owner is TRFC.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

---

I was about to reply with this before you changed the last bit from RIFC to TRFC!:greengrin-

"In December 2012, a company called Rangers International Plc was formed and listed on the London stock exchange and became the holding company for the The Rangers Football Club Ltd which, in turn, owns the football club."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ownership_of_Rangers_F.C.

So the club is the member, who is in turn owned by The Rangers FC, which is in turn owned by RIFC, which is owned by various shareholders and holding companies. Although I'm now confused as to what shares in a football club are, given there might be 2 or 3 holding companies in between! There also seems to be an extra layer of holding company post liquidation - "oldco" then v RIFC/TRFC now.

I know this was mentioned recently, but wasn't it "oldco rangers" who had the (non-transferable) membership, which was why the vote on whether to allow them to join the league happened? If the club was continuous and is the member, then how did it need to re-apply?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bostonhibby

:agree: It's not as if Lord Coe, and the companies associated with him and the Olympic venture have anything to hide?:greengrin

---

Good point *cough cough*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by portycabbage

I was about to reply with this before you changed the last bit from RIFC to TRFC!:greengrin-

"In December 2012, a company called Rangers International Plc was formed and listed on the London stock exchange and became the holding company for the The Rangers Football Club Ltd which, in turn, owns the football club."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ownership_of_Rangers_F.C.

So the club is the member, who is in turn owned by The Rangers FC, which is in turn owned by RIFC, which is owned by various shareholders and holding companies. Although I'm now confused as to what shares in a football club are, given there might be 2 or 3 holding companies in between! There also seems to be an extra layer of holding company post liquidation - "oldco" then v RIFC/TRFC now.

I know this was mentioned recently, but wasn't it "oldco rangers" who had the (non-transferable) membership, which was why the vote on whether to allow them to join the league happened? If the club was continuous and is the member, then how did it need to re-apply?

---

Oldco had the share in the SPL. The SPL had shares rather than membership.

When Oldco 's assets were sold to Sevco, one of those assets was that share. So Sevco had a vote on whether Rangers, the club, were to be allowed to continue in the SPL. They lost the vote, and their share was transferred to Dundee.








Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

And Sevco remain skint. Still no sign of over investment. [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

And, looking at the fixtures they don't have a home game before their November wages day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Oldco had the share in the SPL. The SPL had shares rather than membership.

When Oldco 's assets were sold to Sevco, one of those assets was that share. So Sevco had a vote on whether Rangers, the club, were to be allowed to continue in the SPL. They lost the vote, and their share was transferred to Dundee.








Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

---

But the vote was because of the application to transfer membership of the spl from oldco to sevco, rather than for "the club" to have continuous membership.

"registrations with the Scottish FA and SPL were terminated"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18707522

"SPL chairmen met at Hampden to vote on the new club's application to replace the old Rangers in the top flight."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18703183

"An application to transfer the Scottish Premier League membership from the 'oldco' to the 'newco' was rejected on a 10–1 vote^"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owners...rent_ownership

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/11...162dd364c0.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Now every club in Scotland is going to have to pay for the SFA to defend Sevco against Mike Ashley's very expensive lawyers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by portycabbage

But the vote was because of the application to transfer membership of the spl from oldco to sevco, rather than for "the club" to have continuous membership.

"registrations with the Scottish FA and SPL were terminated"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18707522

"SPL chairmen met at Hampden to vote on the new club's application to replace the old Rangers in the top flight."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18703183

"An application to transfer the Scottish Premier League membership from the 'oldco' to the 'newco' was rejected on a 10–1 vote^"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owners...rent_ownership

---

They still legally owned a share in the company known as the SPL. As a result of that, they had a right to a vote on the membership issue. It was as a result of that vote that the share was transferred to Dundee.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

I cut and pasted this from a Celtic website as it provides a handy timeline of court dates for the next month. I think Scotland is going to need more judges at this rate.
------
Sports Direct v the SFA is just the latest event that seems certain to send Sevco into administration with turkeys more likely to celebrate Boxing Day in good health. December 12th.

Tomorrow Charles Green will be at the Court of Session to get the club to pay his fees for the Ibrox Fraud Case relating to the £5.5m transfer of assets in 2012.

On November 27 the company will attempt to stage an AGM with one of the proposals being to deny voting rights to anyone (Mr Ashley) with a stake in another football club.

December 2 is the final date for BDO to appeal against the verdict in the Big Tax Case, Sevco issued a statement on Monday asking everyone to move on.

On December 9 Mr Ashley will attempt to get Mr King, who was described as a glib and shameless liar by a South African judge, jailed for breaching a court order preventing him from discussing the deal between Sevco and Sports Direct.
---------


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

I cut and pasted this from a Celtic website as it provides a handy timeline of court dates for the next month. I think Scotland is going to need more judges at this rate.
------
Sports Direct v the SFA is just the latest event that seems certain to send Sevco into administration with turkeys more likely to celebrate Boxing Day in good health. December 12th.

Tomorrow Charles Green will be at the Court of Session to get the club to pay his fees for the Ibrox Fraud Case relating to the £5.5m transfer of assets in 2012.

On November 27 the company will attempt to stage an AGM with one of the proposals being to deny voting rights to anyone (Mr Ashley) with a stake in another football club.

December 2 is the final date for BDO to appeal against the verdict in the Big Tax Case, Sevco issued a statement on Monday asking everyone to move on.

On December 9 Mr Ashley will attempt to get Mr King, who was described as a glib and shameless liar by a South African judge, jailed for breaching a court order preventing him from discussing the deal between Sevco and Sports Direct.
---------


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Thanks Ozy.

As the keeper of the diary, it's your job to keep us reminded on a daily basis. Court reports would also be handy. Expenses will not be paid.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Oldco had the share in the SPL. The SPL had shares rather than membership.

When Oldco 's assets were sold to Sevco, one of those assets was that share. So Sevco had a vote on whether Rangers, the club, were to be allowed to continue in the SPL. They lost the vote, and their share was transferred to Dundee.








Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

---

No, that's not right. The original Rangers represented by Duff & Duffer got to vote. Sevco never got their hands on the SPL share.

They (Sevco) also got a temporary membership of the SFA before the original Rangers membership was transferred to them. If it were one club, how could it have 2 simultaneous memberships?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Thanks Ozy.

As the keeper of the diary, it's your job to keep us reminded on a daily basis. Court reports would also be handy. Expenses will not be paid.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

---

Nothing shall be missed, I have psycho Celtic fans reporting to me on every aspect of this case. [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Thanks Ozy.

As the keeper of the diary, it's your job to keep us reminded on a daily basis. Court reports would also be handy. Expenses will not be paid.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

---

And Ozy, don't even think of setting up an EBT :cb

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...orts-1-3944848

For those that won't read the Sun.
I really hope the SFA have a way of passing the cost of this onto Sevco otherwise it's going to cost Hibs money we can little afford right now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pretty clear now the term "sporting integrity" does not describe Scottish football at this time, if it ever did? 😕

Need a new broom!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

No, that's not right. The original Rangers represented by Duff & Duffer got to vote. Sevco never got their hands on the SPL share.

They (Sevco) also got a temporary membership of the SFA before the original Rangers membership was transferred to them. If it were one club, how could it have 2 simultaneous memberships?

---

If the vote was after liquidation, it couldn't have been D&D. They were out of office by then. The only scenario I could see that happening would be if Sevco had authorised them to appear on their behalf. Thinking aloud, that may be part of the conspiracy case.

If the vote was pre-liquidation, it would have been them.

The share was part of the asset sale. Somewhere online, there will be the relevant document. ScotsLawThoughts say this:-

He has paid a total of £5.5 million. Therefore he has acquired everything else for £750,000:-

The Player Contracts – the contracts of employment of those employees of the Company who are professional football players registered with the SFA;

The SFA Membership;

The Company‘s share in the SPL;

The Goodwill and intellectual property rights – the goodwill relating to the business of a professional football club carried on by the Company and the exclusive right to use the name “The Rangers Football Club”;

Stock, plant and equipment and cash at bank;

Amounts owed to the Company (other than the Player Transfer Fees).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

If the vote was after liquidation, it couldn't have been D&D. They were out of office by then. The only scenario I could see that happening would be if Sevco had authorised them to appear on their behalf. Thinking aloud, that may be part of the conspiracy case.

If the vote was pre-liquidation, it would have been them.

The share was part of the asset sale. Somewhere online, there will be the relevant document. ScotsLawThoughts say this:-

He has paid a total of £5.5 million. Therefore he has acquired everything else for £750,000:-

The Player Contracts – the contracts of employment of those employees of the Company who are professional football players registered with the SFA;

The SFA Membership;

The Company‘s share in the SPL;

The Goodwill and intellectual property rights – the goodwill relating to the business of a professional football club carried on by the Company and the exclusive right to use the name “The Rangers Football Club”;

Stock, plant and equipment and cash at bank;

Amounts owed to the Company (other than the Player Transfer Fees).

---

Don't forget that Sevco also bought the 'History'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Now every club in Scotland is going to have to pay for the SFA to defend Sevco against Mike Ashley's very expensive lawyers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

The SFA are run by a bunch of fan dans and if Ashley goes through with this then I hope they are made a complete tit of in court. Passing King as fit and proper was the biggest farce of there's to date!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

If the vote was after liquidation, it couldn't have been D&D. They were out of office by then. The only scenario I could see that happening would be if Sevco had authorised them to appear on their behalf. Thinking aloud, that may be part of the conspiracy case.

If the vote was pre-liquidation, it would have been them.

The share was part of the asset sale. Somewhere online, there will be the relevant document. ScotsLawThoughts say this:-

He has paid a total of £5.5 million. Therefore he has acquired everything else for £750,000:-

The Player Contracts – the contracts of employment of those employees of the Company who are professional football players registered with the SFA;

The SFA Membership;

The Company‘s share in the SPL;

The Goodwill and intellectual property rights – the goodwill relating to the business of a professional football club carried on by the Company and the exclusive right to use the name “The Rangers Football Club”;

Stock, plant and equipment and cash at bank;

Amounts owed to the Company (other than the Player Transfer Fees).

---

http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/106806-rangers-newco-vote-the-spl-powerbrokers-in-their-own-words/

Quote:

---

The 12 Scottish Premier League member clubs will meet on July 4 to decide whether to admit a new company to the league.

The newco, currently known as Sevco 5088 but which plans to trade as The Rangers Football Club, will seek to transfer the share of Rangers FC to itself in order to compete in the SPL next season.

The Rangers Football Club PLC, which remains in administration ahead of a liquidation process while the newco is set up by businessman Charles Green, will get a vote through its existing share. This will be cast by the administrators, Duff and Phelps.

---

The recent statement by Sevco says that a line should now be drawn under the saga and that all clubs should bond together in a concerted attempt to further the interests of Scottish football. How do they reconcile this with their supporters' open declaration of war against every club in Scotland which stood up against them over the past few years? Didn't they openly vow to destroy Scottish football on their return to the top flight?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/106806-rangers-newco-vote-the-spl-powerbrokers-in-their-own-words/

---

So, according to that, the vote was whilst it was in administration. If that's the case, D&D were entitled to vote on the basis that they held the share (not the "membership") in the SPL.

The share allowed them to vote on membership. The 2 are different things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

No, that's not right. The original Rangers represented by Duff & Duffer got to vote. Sevco never got their hands on the SPL share.

They (Sevco) also got a temporary membership of the SFA before the original Rangers membership was transferred to them. If it were one club, how could it have 2 simultaneous memberships?

---

That is what a lot of people, and all Sevconians, forget !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...orts-1-3944848

For those that won't read the Sun.
I really hope the SFA have a way of passing the cost of this onto Sevco otherwise it's going to cost Hibs money we can little afford right now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Or the SFA could chose no to defend the action.

Or wait until Admin2 happens - Green in Court tomorrow !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim44

The recent statement by Sevco says that a line should now be drawn under the saga and that all clubs should bond together in a concerted attempt to further the interests of Scottish football. How do they reconcile this with their supporters' open declaration of war against every club in Scotland which stood up against them over the past few years? Didn't they openly vow to destroy Scottish football on their return to the top flight?

---

There is an important point in here that we should not overlook - Scottish football is a basket case and is probably only a couple of runds up from the Maidstone United's of this world.

What proportion of effort do we want to spend kicking **** out of one another - and making the situation even worse - versus working together to try and get this shambles of a sport on a decent footing?

Right now it looks like 100% on the former and 0% on the latter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibs0666

There is an important point in here that we should not overlook - Scottish football is a basket case and is probably only a couple of runds up from the Maidstone United's of this world.

What proportion of effort do we want to spend kicking **** out of one another - and making the situation even worse - versus working together to try and get this shambles of a sport on a decent footing?

Right now it looks like 100% on the former and 0% on the latter.

---

Would that be the decent footing of a return to Old Firm monopoly in a set up they have no desire to be in and would drop like a hot potato if the English Leagues were stupid enough to adopt them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

So, according to that, the vote was whilst it was in administration. If that's the case, D&D were entitled to vote on the basis that they held the share (not the "membership") in the SPL.

The share allowed them to vote on membership. The 2 are different things.

---

Above I was referring to SFA membership, not the SPL share. For a very brief period, Sevco were given a temporary membership of the SFA while the old Rangers was still a member.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...continues.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim44

Would that be the decent footing of a return to Old Firm monopoly in a set up they have no desire to be in and would drop like a hot potato if the English Leagues were stupid enough to adopt them?

---

Fair point, and that can become part of the dialogue for improving the Scottish game. It ain't going to get addressed if we continue on this path into the abyss.

I think the point re the eligibility of players who received EBT payments is a strong one and does imply IMHO that all games in which they were involved should be retrospectively marked as a 3-0 defeat. I don't think cups won during this period by RFC should be awarded to other teams though - they would just have to be marked as having no winner. It's impossible to say whether or not the losing finalists would have won the cup instead of Rangers because a team RFC knocked out in an earlier round whilst RFC fielded an ineligible player could have gone on to win the cup if a 3-0 win against RFC is assumed. League championships are a different matter though as all results involving RFC fielding ineligible players could be amended and the overall result calculated.

Another main point the authorities need to take into account is that of precedent - both in the sense of taking into account historic examples of action taken where ineligible players have been fielded and of how any action they take now will set a precedent for the future should it be confirmed that players were ineligible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

Above I was referring to SFA membership, not the SPL share. For a very brief period, Sevco were given a temporary membership of the SFA while the old Rangers was still a member.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...continues.html

---

Okay, I get you. So many memberships, so many shares, so many Rangers.

The SPL stuff I can follow, and understand the process. The SFA stuff, though, is a dark place.... which would be so much lighter if the 5 Way Agreement was allowed out into the public domain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibs0666

There is an important point in here that we should not overlook - Scottish football is a basket case and is probably only a couple of runds up from the Maidstone United's of this world.

What proportion of effort do we want to spend kicking **** out of one another - and making the situation even worse - versus working together to try and get this shambles of a sport on a decent footing?

Right now it looks like 100% on the former and 0% on the latter.

---

If the customer base believes the game is rigged, then there can be no decent footing. Bending over to appease the Huns destroys everyone else's confidence that there is a sport in there somewhere worth the bother of turning up. Better to clean up the Augean stables now, void all the competitions the Huns cheated in and then we can move on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GreenOnions

I think the point re the eligibility of players who received EBT payments is a strong one and does imply IMHO that all games in which they were involved should be retrospectively marked as a 3-0 defeat. I don't think cups won during this period by RFC should be awarded to other teams though - they would just have to be marked as having no winner. It's impossible to say whether or not the losing finalists would have won the cup instead of Rangers because a team RFC knocked out in an earlier round whilst RFC fielded an ineligible player could have gone on to win the cup if a 3-0 win against RFC is assumed. League championships are a different matter though as all results involving RFC fielding ineligible players could be amended and the overall result calculated.

Another main point the authorities need to take into account is that of precedent - both in the sense of taking into account historic examples of action taken where ineligible players have been fielded and of how any action they take now will set a precedent for the future should it be confirmed that players were ineligible.

---

Re the league championships, that would only work for the first season they used ebt's as all subsequent seasons they wouldn't have been in the top flight, they would have been relegated with 0 points!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

If the customer base believes the game is rigged, then there can be no decent footing. Bending over to appease the Huns destroys everyone else's confidence that there is a sport in there somewhere worth the bother of turning up. Better to clean up the Augean stables now, void all the competitions the Huns cheated in and then we can move on.

---

It's not bending over to appease anyone, it has to be about getting all clubs to recognise their responsibilities to the wider game and starting to act appropriately. I think we have to be clear - we do not have a game worth bothering to turn up to watch as it stands just now. How is this historical discussion going to do anything to create a better future for the game?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HFCDaveA

Re the league championships, that would only work for the first season they used ebt's as all subsequent seasons they wouldn't have been in the top flight, they would have been relegated with 0 points!

---

You make a good point sir (at least if we assume that ineligible players were fielded in sufficient games to imply RFC had fewer points than any other team) It's agreed though I think that, were 3-0 defeats to be awarded retrospectively for all games where ineligible players were fielded, we cannot just award cups (or probably championships either) to the team that finished second?

I think the precedent thing is quite important though. If it's confirmed at some point that EBT recipients were ineligible then the authorities will need to be aware that any action they take (or don't take) now will affect any action they can take in the future.

We need a complete reboot of our game! Until every part of the SFA/SPFL become transparent and work for the fans, not for self nor the old firm!I think we should start a petition for no confidence in the SFA/SPFL as the line needs to be drawn and all who are involved in this shocking corruption be dealt with appropriately, including those who have moved on ....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GreenOnions

You make a good point sir (at least if we assume that ineligible players were fielded in sufficient games to imply RFC had fewer points than any other team) It's agreed though I think that, were 3-0 defeats to be awarded retrospectively for all games where ineligible players were fielded, we cannot just award cups (or probably championships either) to the team that finished second?

I think the precedent thing is quite important though. If it's confirmed at some point that EBT recipients were ineligible then the authorities will need to be aware that any action they take (or don't take) now will affect any action they can take in the future.

---

I keep thinking about the Spartans situation... on one of the form pages, the laddie signed in one box and missed the other at the bottom, as a result he was deemed ineligible and they were stripped of their win and effectively chucked out the competition that year..... now...... how does the EBT side letters compare to that?... in that situation they (Rangers) were paying players more than they had told the footballing authorities, thereby clearly breaking the rules.

That's purely the "Sporting" rules, the Tax stuff is on top of that.

For me, I think the titles are tainted and should be deleted, not reassigned etc, then we can all move on. :agree:

As an aside, my Dad is a Hun and he was spouting last night that because it looks like the titles wont be taken off them it proves the sporting side wasn't impacted so they won them fair and square and are still record holders in number of titles won :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...orts-1-3944848

For those that won't read the Sun.
I really hope the SFA have a way of passing the cost of this onto Sevco otherwise it's going to cost Hibs money we can little afford right now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I dont understand, how will any of this cost Hibs money? :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hibee87

I dont understand, how will any of this cost Hibs money? :confused:

---

Because the SFA is a membership organisation and any money they spend defending Sevco against Ashley will need to be paid for by the member clubs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Because the SFA is a membership organisation and any money they spend defending Sevco against Ashley will need to be paid for by the member clubs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

And how much do you recon this would cost, im more thinking of the lower league teams. even a 50k contribution could put some teams in serious danger surley?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Because the SFA is a membership organisation and any money they spend defending Sevco against Ashley will need to be paid for by the member clubs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

They won't be defending The Rangers though. It is the SFA who have found them fit and proper so it will be the SFA in court.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Because the SFA is a membership organisation and any money they spend defending Sevco against Ashley will need to be paid for by the member clubs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

They also get revenue from the Scottish Cup and the national team. More likely it would be youth football etc that would lose money than the professional clubs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Because the SFA is a membership organisation and any money they spend defending Sevco against Ashley will need to be paid for by the member clubs.

---

I don't think they can invoice the member clubs for something they've done wrong. It's more likely to affect the budget used for the blazers to lap it up in hospitality at the cup finals and the Scotland games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibs0666

It's not bending over to appease anyone, it has to be about getting all clubs to recognise their responsibilities to the wider game and starting to act appropriately. I think we have to be clear - we do not have a game worth bothering to turn up to watch as it stands just now. How is this historical discussion going to do anything to create a better future for the game?

---

Self evident isn't it? The same reason the Tour de France was voided for the Lance Armstrong years. Pro cycling is interesting in that the authorities spent years from Festina onwards trying to ignore blatant cheating and sweep as much as possible under the carpet in order not to harm commercial interests. Look where that got them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Just Alf

I keep thinking about the Spartans situation... on one of the form pages, the laddie signed in one box and missed the other at the bottom, as a result he was deemed ineligible and they were stripped of their win and effectively chucked out the competition that year..... now...... how does the EBT side letters compare to that?... in that situation they (Rangers) were paying players more than they had told the footballing authorities, thereby clearly breaking the rules.

That's purely the "Sporting" rules, the Tax stuff is on top of that.

For me, I think the titles are tainted and should be deleted, not reassigned etc, then we can all move on. :agree:

As an aside, my Dad is a Hun and he was spouting last night that because it looks like the titles wont be taken off them it proves the sporting side wasn't impacted so they won them fair and square and are still record holders in number of titles won :rolleyes:

---

:agree: Exactly how I feel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

Self evident isn't it? The same reason the Tour de France was voided for the Lance Armstrong years. Pro cycling is interesting in that the authorities spent years from Festina onwards trying to ignore blatant cheating and sweep as much as possible under the carpet in order not to harm commercial interests. Look where that got them.

---

This is not about commercial interests though. Our clubs efforts in Europe are pathetic. Interest in our game beyond Scotland is negligible. Our national team continues to bump along the bottom.

I despise the huns as much as anyone but it will be no cause for celebration to see the huns suffer more if our game turns semi professional due to neglect of the bigger picture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StevieC

I don't think they can invoice the member clubs for something they've done wrong. It's more likely to affect the budget used for the blazers to lap it up in hospitality at the cup finals and the Scotland games.

---

Haha, that's the one budget that would remain untouched.
The money generated by the Scottish cup and the Scotland team should be distributed for the good of the game, not spent on lawyers defending the shocking decision to pass King fit and proper. Should the SFA lose this case, Ashley will be entitled to significant compensation. The value of his shareholding has been almost wiped out by the delisting and the the value of his commercial deals have been totally undermined by King. If Sevco go bust, you can multiply those losses.
Who would bet on the SFA being successful in defending their decision to pass King fit and proper?
This could cost the Scottish game a lot of money.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

And, looking at the fixtures they don't have a home game before their November wages day.

---

John James seems to suggest, bold below, that Sevco have managed to get the £2.5 m needed to see them through to next year. Meanwhile in today's DR, half loaf states he'll have no problem asking for £1m to buy a player! I'm sure he'll have no problem asking!! Mind you he also says they've managed to get every player they went after, looks like Scotty's been airbrushed to history!

If King’s stupidity continues unchecked, his costs of litigation, when added to those of Green, could exceed the £2.5m in emergency funding that has been raised by Mr Taylor and Mr Letham.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Haha, that's the one budget that would remain untouched.
The money generated by the Scottish cup and the Scotland team should be distributed for the good of the game, not spent on lawyers defending the shocking decision to pass King fit and proper. Should the SFA lose this case, Ashley will be entitled to significant compensation. The value of his shareholding has been almost wiped out by the delisting and the the value of his commercial deals have been totally undermined by King. If Sevco go bust, you can multiply those losses.
Who would bet on the SFA being successful in defending their decision to pass King fit and proper?
This could cost the Scottish game a lot of money.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Chances are that they have insurance in place to limit any losses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibs0666

This is not about commercial interests though. Our clubs efforts in Europe are pathetic. Interest in our game beyond Scotland is negligible. Our national team continues to bump along the bottom.

I despise the huns as much as anyone but it will be no cause for celebration to see the huns suffer more whilst our game turns semi professional due to neglect of the bigger picture.

---

The completion has to be fair before anyone can rebuild it. If we are to have reconciliation then there needs to be truth first.
There has been collusion between Rangers (old and new) and the SFA to rig the game and we need to get to the bottom of it first before we can start to think about rebuilding it.
Sticking our head in the sand kidding on its not happening is what has laid our game so low in the first place.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...orts-1-3944848

For those that won't read the Sun.
I really hope the SFA have a way of passing the cost of this onto Sevco otherwise it's going to cost Hibs money we can little afford right now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I don't see how the SFA can pass on costs to Sevco. They themselves made the judgement, Ashley is challenging their decision, so they either defend the judgement or capitulate. Presumably, either action will cost money. If King is dethroned, some may say it's money well spent. :

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim44

I don't see how the SFA can pass on costs to Sevco. They themselves made the judgement, Ashley is challenging their decision, so they either defend the judgement or capitulate. Presumably, either action will cost money. If King is dethroned, some may say it's money well spent. :hibees

---

Neither can I, it was just a forlorn hope.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Chances are that they have insurance in place to limit any losses.

---

Let's hope so.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/whi...medium=twitter


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/whi...medium=twitter


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Groups of Celtic and Hearts fans are becoming unnervingly cooperative,

Someone needs to point out they are among the whitewashers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

The completion has to be fair before anyone can rebuild it. If we are to have reconciliation then there needs to be truth first.
There has been collusion between Rangers (old and new) and the SFA to rig the game and we need to get to the bottom of it first before we can start to think about rebuilding it.
Sticking our head in the sand kidding on its not happening is what has laid our game so low in the first place.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Very lofty statements, but let's get real here. What people want to see is the huns lose titles. You'll need to explain to me how that is going to improve the game going forward in any shape or form. All I can see happening is we'll end up spending the next few years fiddling whilst Rome burns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brog

John James seems to suggest, bold below, that Sevco have managed to get the £2.5 m needed to see them through to next year. Meanwhile in today's DR, half loaf states he'll have no problem asking for £1m to buy a player! I'm sure he'll have no problem asking!! Mind you he also says they've managed to get every player they went after, looks like Scotty's been airbrushed to history!

If King’s stupidity continues unchecked, his costs of litigation, when added to those of Green, could exceed the £2.5m in emergency funding that has been raised by Mr Taylor and Mr Letham.

---

What's interesting about the part in bold is that Rangers or dave kings recent statement suggested all 3 of the 3 bears including Donald Park had dipped their hand in their pocket.

Bloggers said Park was at war with king and had refused to contribute

Here Park is airbrushed

Any journos care to shed light on why no mention of park here now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibs0666

Very lofty statements, but let's get real here. What people want to see is the huns lose titles. You'll need to explain to me how that is going to improve the game going forward in any shape or form. All I can see happening is we'll end up spending the next few years fiddling whilst Rome burns.

---

Simple

No sectarianism

No safe house for sectarianism

No visits from the violent filthy away support

More trophies going to other parts of Scotland

The last 3 years have been a pleasant armageddon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kato

Groups of Celtic and Hearts fans are becoming unnervingly cooperative,

Someone needs to point out they are among the whitewashers.

---

I'd rather not for now. Hopefully when the SFA cave, they launch an investigation in the tax affairs of all clubs in attempt to not make it about Rangers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibs0666

Very lofty statements, but let's get real here. What people want to see is the huns lose titles. You'll need to explain to me how that is going to improve the game going forward in any shape or form. All I can see happening is we'll end up spending the next few years fiddling whilst Rome burns.

---

I think the question needs to be asked, "What would happen if it was another club". Apart from the obvious one who would be treated with kid gloves also all the rest IMO would be absolutely slaughtered and yes they would lose the titles. It is the right thing to do and should happen so that IMO the game moves on.

If we do an inquiry ( by the SFA) and titles trophies etc are removed this sets a base line that all clubs know and understand. Basically if your caught cheating then your team will suffer.

It also shows to teams that if a team is caught cheating then the SFA have the minerals to take you on and it doesn't matter how big you think you are.

Wonder what will happen if the Livingstone Owner files a complaint saying my team was docked 5 points and £10,000 after we admired our misdemeanour. The Rangers have not admitted it found in a Scottish Court to have done it and SFA do nothing about it. Will this not send out to clubs never to admit to anything which may mean getting hammered when we deny it and know nothing will happen to us.

The SFA need to act and act decisively and with a backbone for the good of our game in the long run

GGTTH

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JimBHibees

I think the question needs to be asked, "What would happen if it was another club". Apart from the obvious one who would be treated with kid gloves also all the rest IMO would be absolutely slaughtered and yes they would lose the titles. It is the right thing to do and should happen so that IMO the game moves on.

---

So the huns lose titles. How does that stop Hibs from getting slaughtered by Malmo? How does that help us to qualify for the next World Cup? How does that help us increase TV income so that we get the best players we possibly can into the Scottish game?

It is a sideshow and, as we can see from this site, attracts way more interest and input than its importance merits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Springbank

Simple

No sectarianism

No safe house for sectarianism

No visits from the violent filthy away support

More trophies going to other parts of Scotland

The last 3 years have been a pleasant armageddon

---

Docking titles will not fix sectarianism or a filthy away support - dialogue and deeds will.

Dunno what you've enjoyed most about the last three years - huns getting shafted? the Malmo tie? the relegation? national team ongoing failures?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibs0666

So the huns lose titles. How does that stop Hibs from getting slaughtered by Malmo? How does that help us to qualify for the next World Cup? How does that help us increase TV income so that we get the best players we possibly can into the Scottish game?

It is a sideshow and, as we can see from this site, attracts way more interest and input than its importance merits.

---

Some attempt at cleansing the game of the waft of cheating thereby hopefully allowing the game a fresh start to be taken which will allow the game to improve and achieve some of the things you listed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JimBHibees

Some attempt at cleansing the game of the waft of cheating thereby hopefully allowing the game a fresh start to be taken which will allow the game to improve and achieve some of the things you listed.

---

Removing the waft of cheating will not make us play better in Europe or make us qualify for the world cup. Seriously, we need to collectively start addressing those issues with the same energy and vigour as we pursue company tax laws.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

I'd rather not for now. Hopefully when the SFA cave, they launch an investigation in the tax affairs of all clubs in attempt to not make it about Rangers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

That would include Hearts shameful behavior where the tax man was done out of 1.75m due to the Lithuanian player registration shenanigans. On top of this you have a number of Celtic players and officials reducing their tax bills through avoidance mechanisms where "investments" in film companies worked for them etc. Neil Lennon is one mentioned in the article below but he is one of several figures from Celtic involved including it seems Peter Lawell and Chris Sutton.

http://news.stv.tv/west-central/3082...idance-scheme/

http://www.theguardian.com/football/...x-demands-hmrc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibs0666

So the huns lose titles. How does that stop Hibs from getting slaughtered by Malmo? How does that help us to qualify for the next World Cup? How does that help us increase TV income so that we get the best players we possibly can into the Scottish game?

It is a sideshow and, as we can see from this site, attracts way more interest and input than its importance merits.

---

It doesn't help any of those things. It's completely separate. We have separate threads on those subjects. Lots of them.
Your wishing this would all just go away. It's too late for that no matter how much you wish it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyM_1875

That would include Hearts shameful behavior where the tax man was done out of 1.75m due to the Lithuanian player registration shenanigans. On top of this you have a number of Celtic players and officials reducing their tax bills through avoidance mechanisms where "investments" in film companies worked for them etc. Neil Lennon is one mentioned in the article below but he is one of several figures from Celtic involved including it seems Peter Lawell and Chris Sutton.

http://news.stv.tv/west-central/3082...idance-scheme/

http://www.theguardian.com/football/...x-demands-hmrc

---

Those schemes are down to the individuals concerned. They will be responsible. Celtic and the other clubs involved paid the tax.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibs0666

Removing the waft of cheating will not make us play better in Europe or make us qualify for the world cup. Seriously, we need to collectively start addressing those issues with the same energy and vigour as we pursue company tax laws.

---

If we don't remove the cheating then I don't much care about how successful we are. The game needs to be clean first and foremost.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibs0666

Docking titles will not fix sectarianism or a filthy away support - dialogue and deeds will.

Dunno what you've enjoyed most about the last three years - huns getting shafted? the Malmo tie? the relegation? national team ongoing failures?

---

And how will turning a blind eye to cheating and sweeping any wrongdoing under the carpet help any of that? Make even more fans drift away from a corrupt game? How does that help?