Excellent. Chuck Green appealing the decision on liability for his costs as well, so hopefully turning into a bad day for Sevco...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Printable View
Excellent. Chuck Green appealing the decision on liability for his costs as well, so hopefully turning into a bad day for Sevco...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Are you talking here about the LNS inquiry?Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Not sure what you mean about it having been addressed by the HMRC. This was the subject of the Big Tax Case which HMRC are currently winning.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
If he is then they have not. A number of them were withheld from LNS and the SFA misdirected LNS on what constituted a registration breach.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
1. They've not paid the fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
2. LNS was possibly deceived over the nature of the side-letters, denied certain evidence that led his inquiry to make erroneous conclusions.
The more recent 'common sense' judgement in Big a Tax Case is that these side letters formed a part of the players' employment contracts.
Not dealt with, by a very long way.
The point I was trying to make but you have made it so much better. [emoji3]Quote:
Originally Posted by jacomoseven
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What does the failure of "resolution 10" mean?
It means they can't issue new shares and the can't convert the soft loans they need to equity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
http://thecelticblog.com/2015/12/blo...his-court-date
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ouch!Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
I note that the article claims that they broke the story 'last month'.....so sometime prior to today then :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bostonhibby
1. TrueQuote:
Originally Posted by jacomoseven
2a. Has LNS acknowledged that he was deceived on the side letter issue?
2b. Has LNS asserted that his previous findings on the side letters are now null and void?
I think that's wrong. They can indeed issue new shares but only to existing shareholders based on their existing holdings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
As far as we know he hasn't commented on the question. neither would he, until he's discussed it with the football authorities. This whole situation is hugely embarrassing for the SPFL and the SFA, and my guess is they don't know what to do. I'd further guess that they are hoping that BDO are successful in obtaining leave to appeal the FTT verdict, because if this happens they can carry on with their heads in the sand for another year. On that topic at least. But there's a load of other issues coming up they will need to address.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
OK, so there is no point at this stage in saying that the side letter issue has not been addressed when it has. As you say it will will not be re-visited unless and until all parties acknowledge that there is a material change in circumstances, and there is nothing to indicate that those parties believe that to be the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
2a and 2bQuote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
I suspect you already know the answers to these questions and are just being a smart****.
What's your agenda?
BDO will only be granted leave to appeal the Big Tax Case if things have changed. Very few are granted each year. Anyway setting aside the legal side of things what Murray did was morally indefensible when our pensioners were freezing to death for lack of heating, when the NHS were short of funds and when our brave troops were being killed or injured through lack of equipment Murray thinks its a good idea to pay players £20,000 £30,000 or £40,000 A WEEK and pay no income tax. He should be hounded out of our country
OK, you don't want to debate your assertions. No problems, we'll park it there. And less of the smartarse ****** OK?Quote:
Originally Posted by jacomoseven
While they are hardly suicidal, the muppets on FF are having a bad day. They're having to persuade themselves that the Warburton to Fulham rumour is a minor distraction and the failed resolution 10 hasn't set the heather alight either. What with us snapping at their heels and a wee banana skin in the form of Dumbarton tonight, all is far from hunky dory in Hunland. :greengrin
I fully expect them to whip Dumbarton tonight tbh and that will settle them all down a fair bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim44
It would have been nice if it had been a trip to Falkirk or the likes tonight - that would really have had them squeaking.
Well the point of a discussion forum is to discuss things, and that's what we're doing. So personally I think there is a point in saying that the side letter issue has not been addressed, because that's my view.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
If we left everything to the authorities for them to decide what to do, then Rangers would have gone straight into the premier league when they were formed, and we wouldn't be having this discussion. So I think debating the justice of the situation, the sporting integrity if you will, is important so that those "in charge" of our game know how we all feel.
I'll debate all day.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
How about you do the same, instead of trying to score points?
I think you're probably correct about tonight, but you never know, the horrendous conditions could be a great leveller.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
Hopefully they had a nice heavy pitch last Saturday, again tonight and are nicely softened up to lose points at Raith on Saturday coming.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim44
I don't really understand the Hun apologist line (except for from Huns obv). How doesn't it help Hibs to have Huns in turmoil?Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
I stopped reading that rag in the last millennium. :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Jack Hackett
The resolution says... "the allotment of equity securities in connection with or pursuant to an offer of, or invitation to holders of equity securities and other persons entitled to participate in proportion (as nearly as practicable) to their then holdings of equity securities".Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
I read that as....Had it passed, then they would have been entitled to issue shares to existing shareholders based on their existing shareholdings (eg the soft lenders). However, it failed.
Lawyers on here to translate, please? :greengrin
Journalistic license? or maybe stayed up late especially to launch this "scoop"Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Hackett
[QUOTE=CropleyWasGod;4514550]Another possibility is that the creditors committee.....I think it's called....have instructed BDO to appeal. The smaller creditors, in whose interests the appeal is, may outvote HMRC on that committee.
If that's the case, I think BDO's hands are tied.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk[/QUOTE
to be honest,if it goes to the Supreme Court and HMRC win again!
then it makes easier to argue for "title/trophy stripping :wink:
It's hardly a hun apologist line to state that LNS dealt with the side letter issue - that is just a statement of fact and the hun is in turmoil irrespective of the issue of side letters.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
At what point do we recognise that the very future of Scottish football as a full-time professional sport is at serious risk, and that is a far far greater issue than deleting a few hun references here and there?
I don't think we can afford that :)Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
:agree: Remember Fulham winning a major trophy, the FA cup around 1975, and they have consistently appeared at a higher league level than the rangers so if you listen to what they all had to say about natural progression they should be delighted the warbler is getting a chance at a higher level, and much nearer to London where general bull****ting goes a long way.............Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Armageddonism is certainly a hun apologist line.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
When the foundations of the decision is questionable, it's fair to say that the issue has not yet been put to bed, despite the governing body's attempts to close it out.
Absolutely, the future of the game is at risk, which is surely why it's in everyone's interests to continue to ask the questions and make sure there is no watergate styled cover ups...
It takes a lot of digging to unearth a truth that those in high places want to remain buried.....
.... Which brings me to The Curse of Oak Island...
Anyone watching it?! :hi:
Does it matter what LNS thinks now?Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
at the end of the day,his report is not worth anything anymore!
If/when/maybees aye or naw this goes to the highest court in the land,then who could argue with its findings?
two, let me repeat"two" that's 2% of appeals to the Supreme Court over a one year period are overturned :greengrin
According to STV they can convert loans to shares for existing shareholders up to a limit but "The move will also prevent soft loans currently provided to the company from numerous investors from being converted into shares as planned."Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
http://news.stv.tv/west-central/1334...of-new-shares/
Yep. Good entertainment if a little slow. But like this saga really.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kavinho
Since the Old Huns went pop the only club that's been in trouble is the Yams, for completely different reasons. Without the Huns, Aberdeen and Hearts are starting to fill the vacuum (and we could join them if our recovery continues), St Johnstone, St Mirren, Aberdeen and ICT have all won trophies and Celtc are going backwards at a rate of knots. We're still a long way from a competitive league with a level playing field but at least we're heading in the right direction and our clubs are giving the best Scottish youth more of a platform than they've had for decades. Why we would we want a manifestation of the Huns back?Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
LNS was mislead on the application of the rules by Sandy Bryson.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
How is the future of Scottish football at risk?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
http://www.onfieldsofgreen.com/sevco...en-space-bats/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Going back to the Sports Direct Loan.......I am not convinced that Sevco are in default. I can’t find any reference to there being a time limit. If you look at the statement issued by SD/MA to support their resolution put to the General meeting in June
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/f...lining-5857906
it states “RFC is fully entitled at any time to repay the current £5 million loan to Sports Direct and revert back to the prior shareholding in Rangers Retail of 51% RFC and 49% Sports Direct.” It doesn’t refer to any time limit.
Similarly the expulsion of Lambias and Leach, MA/SD’s nominees on the board, doesn’t appear to be a matter which can be challenged in the court.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...directors.html
The above article states that Lambias offered his and Leach’s resignation if they got a year’s salary. The request was refused and the article goes on “the new board is proceeding with delicacy and precision in respect of contractual matters, wary of triggering unnecessary and potentially expensive legal cases.”
MA/SD have shown that they are more than willing to go to court to secure their interests and if there were a legal way of securing to repayment of the £5m I’m sure that they would have done so.
It looks to me that MA/SD must have thought that Christmas came early when they managed to get security on Murray Park, Edmiston House and Albion Street car park, 2 board members, control of and 75% of profit from Rangers retail and his pals appointed as CEO and Finance Director; effectively running the club for £5m. But when King and his cronies made the hostile takeover a much of his control was usurped. MA/SD effectively found themselves funding the new board with the £5m loan. MA/SD asked for their money back saying “Sports Direct is not a bank” but the board refused. The meeting called in June was his nice way of saying “I’m serious.”
King perhaps thought that he was in a good bargaining position as clearly Sevco appear to have been in control of the £5m loan and its repayment. MA/SD found other means to exert pressure with their contempt of court action on King and the F&P action with the SFA. It seems to me that what MA/SD want is their money back and that may well be the primary reason for the court actions, also a lesson not to play silly bu**ers with him and his company.
If this is the case what is likely to happen? I appears to me that there are at least 2 broad scenarios. One based on MA/SD making it personal and the other making a business based decision.
Scenario 1. MA/SD take King and the SFA all the way through the courts. Who knows what the results of the court action will be. Especially now that SEVCO want to repay the loan. If King and the SFA win, MA/SD will look pretty foolish. If MA/SD win they will do in the man who is seen by many of the blue nose persuasion as a white night and may well put the SFA/SPFL into disarray. But they will be left with a retail contract which can’t be producing the expected returns and an impact on the SD brand in Scotland. Also a football establishment that aren’t too happy with him. Potentially a lose-lose situation.
Scenario 2. MA/SD take the option to settle and withdraw the court actions (assuming he can do this). King’s statement at the AGM re the repaying of the loan looks like this is what SEVCO aim to do. MA/SD are in a pretty strong bargaining position and may be able to secure a settlement that is beneficial to them. If they call off the hounds they can get their money back (assuming that SEVCO actually have the readies) and possibly secure a settlement to their advantage with SEVCO encouraging the fans to buy their shirts from SD for Christmas. Under this scenario they shake hands and pretend that everything is hunky dory.
Clearly many more options are available. MA/SD have made it clear that they won’t be pushed around but we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that MA is first and foremost a businessman who will want to protect his companies interests and SD acts with a business head.
Interesting to see other peoples’ take on this.:confused:
Oh, forgot to say, under both scenarios Hibs win the league and RIFC have to face the play offs.:agree:
I don't think Fulham have ever won the FA Cup or any major trophy?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bostonhibby
They were beaten in the 1975 final by West Ham.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgl07
Fulham have never won the English League, FA Cup or League Cup.
Got me there, but I am going down in a blaze of glory by suggesting that getting up from the Championship to the EPL is a bigger achievement than anything the new boys have ever achieved. As was qualifying for Europe via the fair play spot :na na:Quote:
Originally Posted by jgl07
Also beaten in a European final (Europa/Yoofa/whatever) relatively recently (more recently than The The Huns were, I think).Quote:
Originally Posted by jgl07
Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
That Intertoto thing?
Jesus H. Have a look at what is happening in Scottish football and paint me the positives please.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
Deary me.
No, lost the 2010 Europa League final to Atletico Madrid, after extra time, in Hamburg.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibayernian
The city of Hamburg was not kicked into oblivion by blootered losing supporters and the fine police officers of the host city were not treated like easy targets by marauding fans in Union Flags singing about Ulster.
Fulham sounds like a fine place Warby, go for it.
The future of Scottish football is at risk because we exhibit paralysis by analysis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
People seem delighted the longer that this turmoil continues. At a time when the game desperately needs investment on-going turmoil is precisely the last thing that we need.
Fulham had a sustained spell in the English top division in the 1950s through to the 1969s. They used to have a flag for all First Division clubs around the stadium. When they were relegated to the old Second Division they decided not to put the other flags up as they were only be founding to be there a short time.
This was a good decision as they were soon relegated to Division Three!
Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Apologies if I've picked you up wrong but are you equating the desire to see (The) Rangers get their just Desserts with the demise of Scootish Football?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Topographic Hibby
Cheers.
Ach at least you've got a Petrofac cup final to look forward to.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Well, outside of the "O"F, attendance generally is up. Several clubs reporting far healthier financial positions despite the loss of the apparent blue pound.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Downsides: the game is run by a cabal of fools who armageddonised the product in a way Gerald Ratner could have only dreamed possible. The media covering it are soaked in a sense of Rangers' entitlement meaning people who want at least a counterbalance have to seek the views of bloggers online. We've also not qualified for a major tournament since 98 but I'd gladly blame that on the rise of the OF duopoly and of course, all those players who Mr Black (cough David Murray) said he wouldn't otherwise have got in creating a disincentive to be patient with bringing through youth.
Despite sharing a league with them, I've not missed Rangers at all, least of all their disgraceful fans.
Well said sir,the sooner the rangers or servo get booted out,the better for Scottish football!Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Rangers were liquidated. How many more just desserts do you want?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibayernian
Ho ho.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Mandela
They were booted out for being put into administration, then liquidation. They still have to face the consequences of the side letters. IMO, the recent ruling on the payments being liable to tax result in them being a form of salary. If I remember right LNS didnt class these as a salary. LNS judgement was based on an understanding of what those payments were at the time. That has changed now. LNS also said that they didnt gain a competitive advantage from this, the recent ruling would change the complexion of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Rangers deserve the punishment for the rules they broke, in the same manner other clubs have been for lesser offences. If this is creating a bad image for scottish football, in particular the SFA and SPFL then so be it. Hopefully this will be a wake up call and they will start running things properly in the future.
Even if we brush their past issues under the carpet, Rangers are still causing an embarrassment to Scottish football. the second largest club in scotland, after liquidation, still not learning from their mistakes by spending cash they dont have in their pursuit of getting back to the top. Rangers deserve to be punished.
Nope, that is not the case with attendances I'm afraid, and the only reason that our clubs are in a healthier financial position is because of the huge levels of indebtedness that has been written off or otherwise shed by pretty much every club bar the tims and Aberdeen.Quote:
Originally Posted by steakbake
These are all symptoms of a much wider malaise. Slowly but surely the game is dying up here yet the key thing most people care about - above all else - is to see a dead football club get another kicking.Quote:
Downsides: the game is run by a cabal of fools who armageddonised the product in a way Gerald Ratner could have only dreamed possible. The media covering it are soaked in a sense of Rangers' entitlement meaning people who want at least a counterbalance have to seek the views of bloggers online. We've also not qualified for a major tournament since 98 but I'd gladly blame that on the rise of the OF duopoly and of course, all those players who Mr Black (cough David Murray) said he wouldn't otherwise have got in creating a disincentive to be patient with bringing through youth.
The side letters have been ruled upon previously.Quote:
Originally Posted by HFCDaveA
The club died. What more punishment can you give?Quote:
Rangers deserve the punishment for the rules they broke, in the same manner other clubs have been for lesser offences. If this is creating a bad image for scottish football, in particular the SFA and SPFL then so be it. Hopefully this will be a wake up call and they will start running things properly in the future.
Eh, nah. You canny punish a club for being an embarrassment. :wink:Quote:
Even if we brush their past issues under the carpet, Rangers are still causing an embarrassment to Scottish football. the second largest club in scotland, after liquidation, still not learning from their mistakes by spending cash they dont have in their pursuit of getting back to the top. Rangers deserve to be punished.
Possibly to ensure that the same club is punished properly and make sure they dont cheat again and have Scottish football as fair as possible. From the punishments that have been handed out to Rangers so far, how many do you think have made them think twice about doing similar things in the future? Just look at the amount of money they spent to get out of the third division? Having to take loans out just to survive to keep their overpriced players in the team. Loans that have massive consequences. What do you suggest? Stick Rangers into the top league no questions asked just to go back to the good old ways?? Scottish football was dying well before Rangers went into liquidation, partly because of the way Rangers conducted their finances to try and get ahead of Celtic.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
The club died because of its cheating, and I'm sure that the point has been taken by other clubs.Quote:
Originally Posted by HFCDaveA
If you desperately need investment, Dave King is your go to man.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Oh wait, that's not quite right is it?
I personally couldn't give a monkeys about them getting stripped of their titles, the only thing that's swaying me to care a bit more is that they're absolutely livid at the thought of losing them, that alone almost makes the whole thing worth pursuing.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
I also think anything that could send them on their way to a further administration and points deduction gets my vote.
This issue goes beyond Rangers/theRangers, and they are bit part players (for me) now, all be it the scene of the ongoing dramas..Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
The way things have developed over the years shows me a level of institutionalised bias from the authorities running the game here. I want to see this all out in the open one way or another.
The LNS ruling that you can spilt a club from any tangible entity is laughable - particularly having been undermined in the tax case 'common sense' ruling.
If the LNS hearing was restricted as to what it was allowed to consider (by the governing body with an agenda), then for me it remains right to be revisiting the whole investigation. (New club/old club/holding co/whatever)
Likewise with the still confidential 5way agreement..
without transparency, and following previous failings, you have a lack of trust - Irreparable by just moving on and drawing a line.
Its not predominantly about continuing to kick Rangers (as enjoyable as that is to watch happen to your main rival for promotion) - it's about ensuring the governing bodies are fit to protect the very future of the game that you raised as being worried about.
putting these matters (as 1example - how on earth is DK considered fit and proper) in a court of law will hopefully finally show up right from wrong when it came to what the governing body was prepared to do to support one of its largest members.
According to the bbc site a few mins ago Fulham going to pursue the bread man aggressively!!!!
It Also Sounds Like The Place is Falling To Bits.. bbc radio.. :wink:
Yup, everything we hear from The Rangers is that they want to get back to business as usual, & their media lackeys are bleating this on high. We need to know why stuff happened,Quote:
Originally Posted by Kavinho
who was responsible for the stuff happpening & why so many folk want the same stuff to keep happening. Stuff 'em.
GG
:greengrin Great stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by Malthibby
Totally disagree. The game is showing signs of life. First hopes of a recovery for a very long time.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...ssue-1-3964010 looks like the roof is coming down on them after all !
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And a Christmas stuffing from Hibs.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
WhiIe I prefer your adverb, the report says 'actively'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blaster
I'm bewildered by Hibs 0666 almost obsessive defence of all things Sevco. He is the only Hibs fan I know, & that includes through this forum, peddling this line so regularly & aggressively. Now he seems to have adopted the Armageddon nonsense preached by those who are supposed to lead our game. Let's be clear here, other than the £250k fine which Sevco have not yet paid they have received no punishment. Ignoring their long term transgressions, where they lied & broke rules with impunity will only encourage them to do the same again & will leave every other club wondering why they bother to play within the rules. The real Armageddon occurs when the rule of law breaks down & self interest is the only guiding principle.
How will letting The Rangers away with what they have done make Scottish football better?Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Should we just put up and shut up?
[QUOTE=happiehibbie;4515038]http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...ssue-1-3964010 looks like the roof is coming down on them after all !Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
Jeez, for once their Gorgie cousins are trendsetters! :wink:
Once again...Quote:
Originally Posted by brog
- the huns died - how much more punishment can be inflicted on a corpse?
- we need to make sure the new huns pay the fine, plus interest, for breaching the regulations on disclosure of the side letters
- rather than endless naval gazing, implement a new governance structure that serves to address the myriad issues that has caused our game to become an increasing irrelevance.
That club is dead - how exactly can a club that died get away with it?Quote:
Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs
What are the biggest signs of improvement that you are seeing?Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
I agree re your points 1 & 2 but yet again you fail to explain how ignoring repeated & long term transgressions benefits Scottish football. You also wrongly still refer to their liquidation as a punishment.
The list of different teams that have won the 2 major cup competitions in the last 5 years for one. I make it 9 different sides have won silverware since 2010. The most competitive 5 year period for many decades no?Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
It didn't originally but they have changed it now. I preferred their original effort too!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim44
That's the thing - I don't think they have been ignored - the side letters that everyone is getting excited about have already been dealt with, the old huns have been terminated and the new huns have been absent from top-flight football for the four seasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by brog
I understand the blood lust, but I do not understand the argument that the huns have not been punished. I recognise that the old huns could have been treated more harshly, but I do not understand what is to be gained by kicking them further now that it is a corpse.
They would deny that wouldn't they? You dont answer why it's such a good thing to ignore their cheating and completely ignore how the trophy's have been much more spread out over the last few years now we dont have a team cheating?Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Would you prefer it was back to normal with both Glasgow bigots trying to outdo each other and the rest of us feeding off the scraps?
The cheating has been dealt with already. The duopoly will more likely than not return within the next few years due to the ability of the new huns and celtic to generate income that is way in excess of the rest of scottish football combined.Quote:
Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs
In what way?Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
No its not, it's clearly still going on and it's going on because of their lies.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Burn the *******s.
But we're constantly being told by The Rangers and their fans that the club didn't die; it was the company that owned the club which died. If that's right the club WOULD be getting away with it if they got to keep all the honours they won with financial doping?Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Are you saying that the new huns are avoiding paying tax to fund players salaries that could not otherwise be afforded?Quote:
Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs
Quote:
Originally Posted by brog
Have to agree with your thoughts on this ,almost as if determined to be contrary for the sake of it.No doubt a great hibee but this continued position is baffling.
Well you have to form your own opinions on that one. I think that they are wrong, and the original club no longer exists.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paisley Hibby
Why would i think that?Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Somewhat picking and choosing which bits of LNS report to accept and which to dismiss then? You seem quite happy to accept that he dealt with the side letter issue but ignore that he said they are in essence the same club?Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Cos you stated that it's still going on.Quote:
Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs
Which is why we need to fully understand what has happened, who was responsible, and ensure it can't be repeatedQuote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
I think we already understand enough of where the failures of oversight have occurred without the need to waste any more time and effort naval gazing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kavinho
To go back to the point that the game is in 'recovery mode', there was a link put on a thread (I am useless at finding these old threads etc) from the Jambo blogger/podcast fella who is considered good value by most on here where he had the figures that every club in the top 14 (but possibly 16) Scottish clubs except Celtic and Hibs (can't remember if Rangers were included tbh) had been increasing their average attendance in the last few years.
It was not a point scoring Jambo skewed report and his findings on Hibs were reported accurately with reason, it made interesting reading as the fact Scottish football overall attendance may be down due to Old Firm problems but the game as a whole is generally healthy - surely that is more important?
Edit Ozy had put up the link, its not quite how i have related to things but generally shows a healthier picture than is spoken about in the media
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...earn-1-3949710
You missed my question.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
How has the cheating been dealt with already?
I think the way this debate has gone is sadly typical of the way the whole Rangers issue has progressed in Scotland.
Imo hibs0666 has made some fair and sensible points (and some nonsense that I totally disagree with) but is attempting to come at this from a reasonably balanced point of view. Unfortunately there is no place for perspective and balance when it comes to the Rangers debate. It is black and white, us and them and there is no middle ground. If you attempt to come at this from the middle ground you are quickly driven to one side or the other (see what happened when Alex Thomson and Stan Collymore got involved). Poor hibs0666 comes at this from a sightly different angle and is castigated and called a hun - in this regard we are no better than the Rangers lot.
It would be wrong for Scottish football to spend the next 10 years bickering over title stripping. Whether titles are stripped or not, the past 15 years or so will go down as the most inglorious in Scottish football history as dubious clubs have made a mockery of it. Rangers, Hearts, Dundee, Motherwell, Gretna and many more - many examples of clubs not running themselves, spending money they didn't have and gaining an unfair advantage. Most of the trophies won have been under dubious conditions and are tainted, even if the clubs fight tooth and nail to hang onto them. What value do those trophies really have?
We need to move on. The Rangers mindset makes that impossible so we're stuck and I don't know how we'll progress on that front. The most important thing is finding out the involvement of the Campbell Ogilvies of this world, the deals between Rangers and the SFA and we need to clean up our governing bodies big time. We need to get strict penalties for financial impropriety that will prove an adequate deterrent for clubs of the moral standing of Rangers and Hearts so we can play our football confident that we have a level playing field in future.
We need to bust the myth that Scotland can't survive without a club whose stadium is falling apart at the seams, are never out of court, need £2.5 million to finish the season whilst having 4x the playing budget of their nearest rivals, have fans who are immune to strict laws on sectarian chanting and don't have any concept that anything they have done might have been in any way wrong.
But there needs to be a shift from those who are not fans of Rangers too. The constant bloodlust is not helpful and in many ways legitimises the totally unacceptably inflexible viewpoint that those on the Rangers side choose to take.
The point that is not clear at this moment is, what deals were made in the background by the SFA/ SPL [as it was] to manage the TRFC situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
I see some of your point, but until we understand why an SFA employee told LNS that the players were properly registered, even though the side letters were not disclosed, I for one will not see the situation re the titles as closed. Personally I would rather see the titles voided and the medals left with the players [because I do not agree with the evidence provided to LNS]
That RFC payed for the arrogance of their board is clear, they were liquidated and allowed re-entry to the league without 3 years of accounts. Not great, but for a club with no debt that can generate 30k season tickets it should have been a blip.
The refusal to pay the LNS fine grates with many people [me included] but the pantomime at TRFC is just a sideshow.
The SFA / SPFL are the guardians of Scottish Football, but they are not public bodies and are not accountable to fans - as Doncaster put it, the SPFL is a trade federation. Look at the simple mistakes they make around scheduling of games - the play-off final is the day after the Scottish Cup final next year [again] - they always put the cash in front of the fans. The SFA can't even organise a cup draw at a time that is relevant to fans [and is only available live on a subscription service]. What we need to know is what have Reagan and Doncaster done to smooth the way back for TRFC.
If t'internet is to be believed, Petrie and Lawell voted against the GASL as a fit and proper person - this will no doubt be disclosed at one of the up and coming sideshows. Both should be congratulated, if true, for making a blindingly obvious decision, but what about the rest?
So to the bloodlust. In a staightforward sense, had TRFC paid their debts and simply got on with using their substantial financial clout [in terms of the Scottish game] to get themselves back towards the top of the game in Scotland there is little that could have been thrown at the new board. That they seem to have been in cohoots with those running the game in Scotland is the bit that gets to me [secret 5-way agreements]. Pernicious is probably the better word for describing the current state of affairs, with little clarity likely till the various court cases and appeals have run their course.
So at the moment I have my metaphorical popcorn on the table and am waiting for the main feature.
Ramble over. :soapbox: