Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Kerrydale Street. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use.

If you decide to register, please be aware that we don't accept email addresses from free web accounts like gmail, Hotmail, live.co.uk etc. Sorry, but almost all of the abuse and spam that we get is from free web accounts. The software on the forum will automatically block any requests using a free email account.

Upon Registration, you will be given access to all our varied Forums, and you will be expected to comply with our fairly stringent Rules and Regulations. Meantime, enjoy your visit

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
The Board - general discussion (including Res 12); notes from the AGM
Topic Started: 15 Jul 2014, 12:03 AM (1,414,608 Views)
tinytim81
Member Avatar
42
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Auldyin
9 Jul 2016, 11:09 AM
tinytim81
9 Jul 2016, 01:33 AM
Auldyin
8 Jul 2016, 11:56 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Where does it go from here though? Obviously that acknowledgment from UEFA is great but what does that do for us knowing that no action will be taken? What about the SFA for example?

This isn't a criticism. The work done here is fantastic.
After seeking clarification on the points UEFA Club Licensing and FFP made and challenging others with the UEFA Club Financial Control Body Res12 will have run its course in terms of responsibility to those shareholders who supported the Resolution.

It will depend on what UEFA say in response, but even if Res12 had been passed in 2013 what happened next would still depend on what UEFA have to say.

The issue here is not looking at what was said or done, it is about checking if what was said or done or not done as rules required was honest.

That is why an investigation is needed not so much into what was said done by RFC, no point in that for reasons given by UEFA, but what was not done by SFA that should have been.

The UEFA response once the hoo ha has died down now makes this squarely about how our game is governed, not just in 2011 but since when irregularities were drawn to both SFA and SPFLs attention (iro the LNS Commision).

Will Celtic be satisfied after Res12 has run its course that the SFA/SPFLS have acted properly? Are other clubs in the SPFL? That will be the issue.

Cheers man, and congratulations on your hard work showing results :thumbsup:
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hoops For Me All The Way
Member Avatar
You want equality? Consider if that person feels Equal.
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Thank you to everyone involved in R12.

You are part of our history and we owe you. As does Scottish football.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Connolly's Rhebels
Member Avatar
First-team captain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Auldyin
8 Jul 2016, 11:52 PM
pedrok
8 Jul 2016, 06:57 PM
He Cometh
8 Jul 2016, 06:56 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
So why use the word company at all?
a repeat of my last word from CQN.

Maybe I’m too negative, but why allow some ambiguity to remain with the ” club/company” reference?


They’ve never denied it was a new company. This wording leaves wriggle room in my opinion.
================================

The ambiguity is from an misunderstanding (deliberate?) of UEFA Article 12.

Chapter 2: Licence Applicant and Licence

Article 12 – Definition of licence applicant

1 A licence applicant may ONLY be a football CLUB, i.e. a legal entity fully responsible
for a football team participating in national and international competitions which
either:

a) is a registered member of a UEFA member association and/or its affiliated
league (hereinafter: registered member); or

b) has a contractual relationship with a registered member (hereinafter: football
company).

2 The membership and the contractual relationship (if any) must have lasted – at
the start of the licence season – for at least three consecutive years. Any
alteration to the club’s legal form or company structure (including, for example,
changing its headquarters, name or club colours, or transferring stakeholdings
between different clubs) during this period in order to facilitate its qualification on
sporting merit and/or its receipt of a licence to the detriment of the integrity of a
competition
is deemed as an interruption of membership or contractual
relationship (if any) within the meaning of this provision
=================

In Europe clubs can be a) or b) and at present the club operating from Ibrox looks like its b) if RIFC have a contractual relationship with TRFC.

RIFC do not have a contractual relationship with RFC 1872 so if they apply they are a new club/company under b)

If TRFC apply they are a new club under a).

UEFA had to cover the current construct in their reply to make the point neither a) nor b) would face sanctions because to UEFA they are “new”.

If they are not “new” UEFA would have sanctioned them in 2012 for breaches in 2011.

RFC 1872 were not sanctioned and TRFC/RIFC were not eligible for three years because they are new.


I’ll say no more on this use of the term “company” to mean anything other than what UEFA intend for its not what Res12 was about. An unforeseen consequence, a question that was never asked and what UEFA volunteered by way of explaining no sanction in 2011.
And irrespective of how one interprets the a and b definitions, they are merely conditions to the ultimate point that is irrefutable, they MUST be a Football Club to get a licence.

Well done Auldyin et al. :worthy:
Edited by Connolly's Rhebels, 9 Jul 2016, 12:12 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Walter Sobchak
Member Avatar
NSSST NSSST NSSST
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
No one will take any notice of this unless the original copy of the letter is released.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
44bhoy
First-team starter
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
pedrok
9 Jul 2016, 11:41 AM
Auldyin
9 Jul 2016, 11:09 AM
tinytim81
9 Jul 2016, 01:33 AM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
After seeking clarification on the points UEFA Club Licensing and FFP made and challenging others with the UEFA Club Financial Control Body Res12 will have run its course in terms of responsibility to those shareholders who supported the Resolution.

It will depend on what UEFA say in response, but even if Res12 had been passed in 2013 what happened next would still depend on what UEFA have to say.

The issue here is not looking at what was said or done, it is about checking if what was said or done or not done as rules required was honest.

That is why an investigation is needed not so much into what was said done by RFC, no point in that for reasons given by UEFA, but what was not done by SFA that should have been.

The UEFA response once the hoo ha has died down now makes this squarely about how our game is governed, not just in 2011 but since when irregularities were drawn to both SFA and SPFLs attention (iro the LNS Commision).

Will Celtic be satisfied after Res12 has run its course that the SFA/SPFLS have acted properly? Are other clubs in the SPFL? That will be the issue.

It seems to me to be about-

What the SFA knew.
When they knew.
What they did with this information.

Indeed. What and when. Simple questions, straightforward answers.

Well done to the RES12 team. Marvellous marvellous job!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jbj712
Getting on a bit
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Total respect and admiration for the courage, tenacity and perserverance shown by all those involved in this struggle!
The whole of Scottish football owes these guys a huge debt of gratitude for their efforts to clean up the game.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DhenBhoy
Everyone's Fantasy Football first pick
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Utmost respect for getting this far against all odds. When huge organisations close ranks and are assisted by a compliant media it's hard to get at the truth.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Auldyin
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
OverAndOver
9 Jul 2016, 11:46 AM
First of all what a fantastic effort from the Resolution 12 guys - sheer perseverance paid off - a great deal of gratitude is owed to you as i fear if this matter had been left with the board to deal with it would not have seen the light of day.

Secondly this passage is taken from the statement at 6pm on CQN last night

However, in terms of accountability, the full UEFA response, when set against and contrasted with other information in the public domain, previous replies and public statements from the SFA, has raised further significant and as yet unanswered questions that shareholders feel should be drawn to the attention of UEFA Club Financial Control Body, the SFA (who said they would cooperate with any enquiry/investigation by UEFA) and Celtic, whom UEFA invited to take up directly.


If i am reading this correctly it states that UEFA have invited Celtic to get involved directly - if Auldyin is about - has this happened ? and if not is it likely to happen in the near future ?


The final point in the Update on CQN is that once UEFA have been written to Res12 will have met it's responsibilities to shareholders in taking the matter to UEFA CFCB.

To complete it Celtic have a decision to make based on the points made and that decision will be a more informed one if they wait until the full shareholders concerns have been articulated.

So it would be best if the Res12 baton was carried over the line before being handed over.

Taking it too early could be a fumble.

Edited by Auldyin, 9 Jul 2016, 08:07 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DhenBhoy
Everyone's Fantasy Football first pick
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
JJ's latest

Thought it was relevant to this thread as well and have posted twice: mods feel free to delete.
Edited by DhenBhoy, 9 Jul 2016, 08:11 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Adam Smith 11
Member Avatar
Contract up for renewal, now on a diet and trying harder.
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Auldyin
9 Jul 2016, 08:06 PM
OverAndOver
9 Jul 2016, 11:46 AM
First of all what a fantastic effort from the Resolution 12 guys - sheer perseverance paid off - a great deal of gratitude is owed to you as i fear if this matter had been left with the board to deal with it would not have seen the light of day.

Secondly this passage is taken from the statement at 6pm on CQN last night

However, in terms of accountability, the full UEFA response, when set against and contrasted with other information in the public domain, previous replies and public statements from the SFA, has raised further significant and as yet unanswered questions that shareholders feel should be drawn to the attention of UEFA Club Financial Control Body, the SFA (who said they would cooperate with any enquiry/investigation by UEFA) and Celtic, whom UEFA invited to take up directly.


If i am reading this correctly it states that UEFA have invited Celtic to get involved directly - if Auldyin is about - has this happened ? and if not is it likely to happen in the near future ?


The final point in the Update on CQN is that once UEFA have been written to Res12 will have met it's responsibilities to shareholders in taking the matter to UEFA CFCB.

To complete it Celtic have a decision to make based on the points made and that decision will be a more informed one if they wait until the full shareholders concerns have been articulated.

So it would be best if the Res12 baton was carried over the line before being handed over.

Taking it too early could be a fumble.

Thanks for relaying the info Auldyin ;)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Broadly Equivalent Bhoy
Everyone's Fantasy Football first pick
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Auldyin
8 Jul 2016, 11:37 PM
Broadly Equivalent Bhoy
8 Jul 2016, 11:27 PM
I wonder if the announcement on CQN today is an attempt to put pressure on the Board to get involved.

Given that it is now clear that we were cheated out of the chance of CL football in 2011/12 there is no excuse for the club's continuing silence on this matter.
That has not been 100% established, only a thorough investigation taking all factors into account would do that.

That is why a further response is going to UEFA later as the update explains.

After that who knows but Res12 will have met its obligations to the signatories of the Resolution.
Cheers Auldyin, grateful for the update and all your hard work. Keep on keeping on. :thumbsup:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Auldyin
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
44bhoy
9 Jul 2016, 02:03 PM
pedrok
9 Jul 2016, 11:41 AM
Auldyin
9 Jul 2016, 11:09 AM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
It seems to me to be about-

What the SFA knew.
When they knew.
What they did with this information.

Indeed. What and when. Simple questions, straightforward answers.

Well done to the RES12 team. Marvellous marvellous job!
I suppose it depends on who in the SFA knew and what they knew.

What we do know is Campbell Ogilvie instigated the DOS ebts that gave rise to the wee tax bill. He was Vice President then President from early June 2011. We don't know if he knew that HMRC had written to HMRC in Feb 2011 putting the case for payment or that RFC had agreed the liability in mid Feb 2011 and the final amount of £2.8m at start of third week in March. We also don't know if he was aware of the actual tax demand of 20th May that replicated much of the information in the 23 Feb letter. That would depend on it being given to the SFA by RFC so he might not.

Then there is Andrew Dickson. He sat on 3 of the 4 Licensing Committee meetings in 2011. He is very experienced in football administration matters, the man Regan went to in Dec 2011 when questions were being asked about the overdue payable and whom Regan e mailed a day later to get a draft cleared that never saw the light of day as the recipient's collectively shat it.

Dickson also knew all about the other BTC ebts and side letters kept private from SFA and HMRC having been responsible for the players files and contracts that were in them since 2004.

What we don't know is if he was aware of the HMRC letter of 23 Feb 2011 or the demand of 20th May , 30 days after which it became overdue if not appealed. We know it existed but not who saw it.

Then there was the statement in the half yearly accounts dated 1st April 2011 which the SFA would have seen. In it the RFC Chairman Alistair Johnson described the liability as "potential and under discussion". It was neither. Collection (not liability) had been put on hold with HMRCs agreement apparently when amount agreed in last week in March until the Takeover happened, presumably because there was an agreement subsequently made public in early June for it to be paid by the purchaser from Motherwell.

That 6 week delay meant the bill would have become overdue end of April if issued when liability amount agreed which might have seen it arrive just before 31st March if HMRC had not agrred to dally.

The presentation of the liability as potential and under discussion in the half yearly accounts might have been enough for SFA to take on face value, but SFA had a mandate from all licence applicants to confirm things with HMRC.

Did they and if not why not? Who or what gave them satisfaction all was in order in March 2011?
It might well have been but it is answers to questions like this that are needed to satisfy supporters that the SFA acted diligently.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
esme stuart
Member Avatar
Occasional Substitute
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tiny Tim
8 Jul 2016, 08:05 PM
Willie Wonka
8 Jul 2016, 07:23 PM
New club - check
New company - check
Applied for admittance & not a peep of demotion- check.

Now that's a good day


exactly. That sentence will be rammed down the gullets of any hun lickspittles who come out with any relegation pish
The VERY LEAST the club should do is reflect this in the merchandise relating to the Sevco game on 10th Sept, specifically the matchday programme and the honours the new club/company possess.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
valley of the clueless
I'm new. Be gentle.
I, unfortunately, have no hope Celtic will do the right thing here, everything I have observed, from not wanting this Resolution in the AGM, to their present silence, has led me to that conclusion. If the fantastic work by Celtic fans did not happen, we would not be having this discussion now. Its the most damming failure by the Celtic board since Fergus times, I can grudgingly accept mismanagement on the football front (Willo Flood transfer window) etc, but this is about the integrity of the game, the entire fabric the sport is based upon, simple fair play, and the Club are silent. The board should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Fearghas
Member Avatar
First-team captain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
valley of the clueless
10 Jul 2016, 08:04 AM
I, unfortunately, have no hope Celtic will do the right thing here, everything I have observed, from not wanting this Resolution in the AGM, to their present silence, has led me to that conclusion. If the fantastic work by Celtic fans did not happen, we would not be having this discussion now. Its the most damming failure by the Celtic board since Fergus times, I can grudgingly accept mismanagement on the football front (Willo Flood transfer window) etc, but this is about the integrity of the game, the entire fabric the sport is based upon, simple fair play, and the Club are silent. The board should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.
they have no shame.

most of them are tories and one of them even abstained from voting
against savage welfare cuts to the most vulnerable in society.

but i agree with your sentiments.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
pedrok
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
esme stuart
10 Jul 2016, 01:39 AM
Tiny Tim
8 Jul 2016, 08:05 PM
Willie Wonka
8 Jul 2016, 07:23 PM
New club - check
New company - check
Applied for admittance & not a peep of demotion- check.

Now that's a good day


exactly. That sentence will be rammed down the gullets of any hun lickspittles who come out with any relegation pish
The VERY LEAST the club should do is reflect this in the merchandise relating to the Sevco game on 10th Sept, specifically the matchday programme and the honours the new club/company possess.
They should. But they won't.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
auldbhoy1975
Member Avatar
Occasional Substitute
[ *  *  *  * ]
Interesting to note the part on JJ's article re the possibility of an expulsion for Scottish teams from euro competition
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Walter Sobchak
Member Avatar
NSSST NSSST NSSST
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
auldbhoy1975
10 Jul 2016, 10:13 AM
Interesting to note the part on JJ's article re the possibility of an expulsion for Scottish teams from euro competition
Interesting to note because if it's in a a JJ article that it's likely unmitigated made up bullshampoo ?

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
auldbhoy1975
Member Avatar
Occasional Substitute
[ *  *  *  * ]
Walter Sobchak
10 Jul 2016, 10:20 AM
auldbhoy1975
10 Jul 2016, 10:13 AM
Interesting to note the part on JJ's article re the possibility of an expulsion for Scottish teams from euro competition
Interesting to note because if it's in a a JJ article that it's likely unmitigated made up bullshampoo ?

on the contrary

I've said before, if the SFA are punished it's likely it's member clubs will bear the brunt

i.e mainly us
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
remy mcswain
Member Avatar
Big in Canada
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
auldbhoy1975
10 Jul 2016, 11:30 AM
Walter Sobchak
10 Jul 2016, 10:20 AM
auldbhoy1975
10 Jul 2016, 10:13 AM
Interesting to note the part on JJ's article re the possibility of an expulsion for Scottish teams from euro competition
Interesting to note because if it's in a a JJ article that it's likely unmitigated made up bullshampoo ?

on the contrary

I've said before, if the SFA are punished it's likely it's member clubs will bear the brunt

i.e mainly us
Pish
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Celtic Football Club Discussion Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply