|
The Board - general discussion (including Res 12); notes from the AGM
|
|
Topic Started: 15 Jul 2014, 12:03 AM (1,414,568 Views)
|
|
Hooped_Crusader
|
16 Nov 2016, 05:01 PM
Post #9081
|
- Posts:
- 2,569
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #1,727
- Joined:
- 30 July 2005
|
Was at the game AGM today.
Pretty boring affair, when things go well on the field the AGM is usually a tepid affair. All positive messages. Sterling work by the Celtic Foundation.
MOTM goes to Arthur/Paul for his deadpan comedy routine. A few years in a row the +70yo has entertained the crowd.
Most relevant question came from a Club 67/Celtic season tickets holder about the pricing of three match packages for the CL and for three games one of which was against Newfilth.
Worst question was the guy moaning about lack of 'diversity' on the board. Tool.
|
|
|
| |
|
Hooped_Crusader
|
16 Nov 2016, 05:04 PM
Post #9082
|
- Posts:
- 2,569
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #1,727
- Joined:
- 30 July 2005
|
- cartuja
- 16 Nov 2016, 04:34 PM
- littlegmbhoy
- 16 Nov 2016, 04:08 PM
Was anyone actually there in regards to the toilet issues & Der Hun wrecking them...
Just like to know if the club are serious about those carrots paying the bill?
The guy who asked about the toilets was one of only 2 people in the hall who voted against the 'Fans Forum' resolution. If he wants information on the wrecked toilets situation, why would he not want a forum that gives direct access to the Board to ask just this type of question? Even the Board voted in favour of the resolution. The first time they have ever supported a resolution led by the Celtic Trust. Weirdo. Edit: Lawwell indicated that he is in discussion with Sevco about who is going to pay for the repairs. So, it's not a given that the home team pays under the kind of arrangement Celtic had with Rangers. Beyond that, there was no comment on the perpetrators as it is a matter for an on-going police investigation. I agree.
It was intimated that 'we would be fine'.
Bankier seemed to imply that we will not be picking up the tab. No actual hard answer though.
|
|
|
| |
|
littlegmbhoy
|
16 Nov 2016, 05:04 PM
Post #9083
|
- Posts:
- 4,261
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #34,917
- Joined:
- 20 June 2016
- Favourite all-time player
- Henke
|
- Chalmers
- 16 Nov 2016, 04:53 PM
- littlegmbhoy
- 16 Nov 2016, 04:38 PM
- cartuja
- 16 Nov 2016, 04:34 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Ta. Did Pistol sound serious..Sorry I sound like adog with a bone but like most on here thought they had agreed/ had already paid the damage. They were quick with us for banners, blow up squirrels etc. This one seems to have gone quiet? You think we will get them to pay then by his response?
It shouldn't be up for debate. SPFL rules: - Quote:
-
In the event that any damage shall be caused to the fabric of the ground, including any fixtures and fittings at the ground, of a Home Club by the supporters of the Visiting Club, on the occasion of an Official Match then the Visiting Club shall be obliged to indemnify the Home Club in the costs reasonably incurred by the Home Club in repairing and making good such damage. http://spfl.co.uk/docs/067_324__therulesofthespfl_1375800603.pdfPage 66. It was two months ago now so Sevco from Pistols response to set questions today seem to be not paying/playing ball with costs.
|
|
|
| |
|
Cumbernauldbhoy
|
16 Nov 2016, 05:05 PM
Post #9084
|
Retired and now a BT Sports pundit
- Posts:
- 11,192
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #29,894
- Joined:
- 14 November 2011
|
Seen on Twitter someone apparently asked how we could 'curb the green brigades enthusiasm', what the eff does that mean?
|
|
|
| |
|
greenjedi
|
16 Nov 2016, 05:06 PM
Post #9085
|
- Posts:
- 17,958
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #22
- Joined:
- 31 August 2004
- Favourite all-time player
- Paul McStay
- Twitter Name
- @greenjedi8
|
- Chalmers
- 16 Nov 2016, 04:53 PM
- littlegmbhoy
- 16 Nov 2016, 04:38 PM
- cartuja
- 16 Nov 2016, 04:34 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Ta. Did Pistol sound serious..Sorry I sound like adog with a bone but like most on here thought they had agreed/ had already paid the damage. They were quick with us for banners, blow up squirrels etc. This one seems to have gone quiet? You think we will get them to pay then by his response?
It shouldn't be up for debate. SPFL rules: - Quote:
-
In the event that any damage shall be caused to the fabric of the ground, including any fixtures and fittings at the ground, of a Home Club by the supporters of the Visiting Club, on the occasion of an Official Match then the Visiting Club shall be obliged to indemnify the Home Club in the costs reasonably incurred by the Home Club in repairing and making good such damage. http://spfl.co.uk/docs/067_324__therulesofthespfl_1375800603.pdfPage 66. Getting the money from them however is a different story. We might need to get it from the SPFL when they dish out the money at the end of the season.
|
|
|
| |
|
Oscar Strummer
|
16 Nov 2016, 05:14 PM
Post #9086
|
The Artist Formerly Known As lubomir25
- Posts:
- 5,307
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #3,991
- Joined:
- 5 June 2006
|
- greenjedi
- 16 Nov 2016, 05:06 PM
- Chalmers
- 16 Nov 2016, 04:53 PM
- littlegmbhoy
- 16 Nov 2016, 04:38 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
It shouldn't be up for debate. SPFL rules: - Quote:
-
In the event that any damage shall be caused to the fabric of the ground, including any fixtures and fittings at the ground, of a Home Club by the supporters of the Visiting Club, on the occasion of an Official Match then the Visiting Club shall be obliged to indemnify the Home Club in the costs reasonably incurred by the Home Club in repairing and making good such damage. http://spfl.co.uk/docs/067_324__therulesofthespfl_1375800603.pdfPage 66.
Getting the money from them however is a different story. We might need to get it from the SPFL when they dish out the money at the end of the season.
They will be giving us tickets soon for Ibrox.
And they will want paid for those tickets...
|
|
|
| |
|
greenjedi
|
16 Nov 2016, 05:16 PM
Post #9087
|
- Posts:
- 17,958
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #22
- Joined:
- 31 August 2004
- Favourite all-time player
- Paul McStay
- Twitter Name
- @greenjedi8
|
- Oscar Strummer
- 16 Nov 2016, 05:14 PM
- greenjedi
- 16 Nov 2016, 05:06 PM
- Chalmers
- 16 Nov 2016, 04:53 PM
Getting the money from them however is a different story. We might need to get it from the SPFL when they dish out the money at the end of the season.
They will be giving us tickets soon for Ibrox. And they will want paid for those tickets... and we need to get independent observers there to check the state of the place immediatley before, during and after the game
|
|
|
| |
|
Dubz
|
16 Nov 2016, 05:17 PM
Post #9088
|
- Posts:
- 4,757
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #27,189
- Joined:
- 7 November 2010
- Favourite all-time player
- Daniel Fergus McGrain
|
- greenjedi
- 16 Nov 2016, 05:06 PM
- Chalmers
- 16 Nov 2016, 04:53 PM
- littlegmbhoy
- 16 Nov 2016, 04:38 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
It shouldn't be up for debate. SPFL rules: - Quote:
-
In the event that any damage shall be caused to the fabric of the ground, including any fixtures and fittings at the ground, of a Home Club by the supporters of the Visiting Club, on the occasion of an Official Match then the Visiting Club shall be obliged to indemnify the Home Club in the costs reasonably incurred by the Home Club in repairing and making good such damage. http://spfl.co.uk/docs/067_324__therulesofthespfl_1375800603.pdfPage 66.
Getting the money from them however is a different story. We might need to get it from the SPFL when they dish out the money at the end of the season. We'll call it quits when the wee erseholes break the seats at the bastard garden in December.
|
|
|
| |
|
johnbhoy1958
|
16 Nov 2016, 05:22 PM
Post #9089
|
Knackered with a Capital F!!!!
- Posts:
- 1,758
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #29,876
- Joined:
- 10 November 2011
- Favourite all-time player
- Bobby Muroch
- Twitter Name
- @johnbhoy1958
|
- Cumbernauldbhoy
- 16 Nov 2016, 05:05 PM
Seen on Twitter someone apparently asked how we could 'curb the green brigades enthusiasm', what the eff does that mean? Guy complimented GB on the bulk of the stuff they do(rightly imo).He asked what the club intend to do wrt the times when things go wrong.I assume he's talking about certain banners,flares etc.PL,to be fair,quickly pointed out that you can't always lay the blame for any wrongdoing at the feet of the GB. The guy was asking,understandably, because eventually,in his opinion,and I'm sure others have thought the same,UEFA,whoever,if these discretions continue,will come down hard on the club. He didn't get any sort of definitive answer,though.
|
|
|
| |
|
caoimhe
|
16 Nov 2016, 06:15 PM
Post #9090
|
- Posts:
- 139
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #2,932
- Joined:
- 30 January 2006
|
We used to have an agreement with oldco but not newco plus Lawwell doesnt trust newco. As of a few weeks ago we hadnt billed them[cost was nowhere near as reported though]
|
|
|
| |
|
Gothamcelt
|
16 Nov 2016, 06:32 PM
Post #9091
|
Retired and now a BT Sports pundit
- Posts:
- 10,926
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #26,222
- Joined:
- 12 June 2010
- Favourite all-time player
- Sir Kenny Dalglish
|
Alex Thomson has tweeted Time for an external inquiry into Scottish football governance? The offshore game have updated their original blog. DOING SFA FOR FAIR PLAY: A REPORT INTO THE RANGERS TAX AFFAIR AND THE ROLE OF THE SCOTTISH FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION
Spoiler: click to toggle BLOG MAY 5, 2016[/b] The Offshore Game’s new report into the Rangers tax affair shows just how a badly-run football association can undermine a level playing field – and what needs to be done about it. Here’s the short version… In 2012 Rangers were put into liquidation. One of the contributing factors to this was an offshore tax avoidance scheme that went (comprehensively and predictably) wrong. This new report looks at two questions that confronted Scottish football regulators, connected to the attempt by Rangers to escape from paying taxes on players wages. In both these questions we have found serious evidence of impropriety by the Scottish Football Association (SFA), which brings into question their ability to fairly manage competition in Scotland’s game. The analysis is based on multiple documents which we also republish here: those fully in the public domain such as court records, and a set of documents which had been leaked from Rangers over a period of time. The full report can be downloaded here. http://www.theoffshoregame.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Web-edition-Doing-SFA-for-Fair-Play-Main-report-updated.pdfThe annexes, which contain the documents used as the basis of our analysis, can be found here. ISSUE 1 – THE SPL INQUIRY INTO RULE BREAKING AT RANGERSThe first concerns the judge-led Commission set up by the Scottish Premier League (SPL) into alleged rule breaking by Rangers in the run up to their collapse. The Commission considered whether Rangers should be stripped of a series of league and cup titles. It is clear from the documents that the then President of the SFA, Campbell Ogilvie, misled the public and the judge presiding over the inquiry, which led them to make a material error of fact in their judgement. Specifically, Mr Ogilvie told the public and the inquiry that nothing to do with the payments to players through Employee Benefits Trusts fell within his role at Rangers. However, documentary evidence is clear that in fact Mr Ogilvie was a central figure in the establishment of the Discounted Options Scheme, which was a tax avoidance scheme that was part of the Rangers Employee Benefit Trust. The fact that Mr Ogilvie had previously been one of the longest serving officials in the history of Rangers Football Club clearly raises questions as to the motive behind his statements – since the inquiry’s own findings imply that, in full possession of the facts, they would have to have reached a different decision. Mr Ogilvie and the SFA did not respond to our requests for comment. ISSUE 2 – RANGERS’ LICENCE TO PLAY IN EUROPE 2011/2012The second issue concerns the grant and retention of a licence to play in Europe to Rangers in the 2011/12 season, when the finances of the club suggested it was on the verge of imminent collapse. UEFA rules are clear that in order to get a licence to play European football a club must prove that it has no overdue payables to tax authorities. Our analysis of the evidence shows that Rangers clearly had an overdue payable as defined in the UEFA rules and could not have met that test. However, regardless of this, the SFA did grant Rangers a licence. Although the SFA were informed by Rangers of an on-going issue concerning a large tax bill, they accepted Ranger’s erroneous argument that this did not break any UEFA rules. It appears that the SFA did little to test the explanation regarding the status of the bill given by Rangers, and subsequent correspondence reveals an unhealthy degree of co-ordination between Rangers and the SFA over the PR around the decision. As history unfolded, Rangers were knocked out before reaching the group stages of the Champion’s League. Had they managed to achieve victory in the qualifying rounds, they might well have gained the resources they needed to keep the club afloat and to pay the overdue tax bill based on Champions League income, thwarting the very purpose of UEFA FFP Articles in respect of overdue tax. Again, the fact that the SFA had done nothing to question the obvious issues in Rangers’ financial returns calls into question their effectiveness as a regulator. THE CRUCIAL ROLE OF SPORT REGULATORSIn sports, regulators have a particular responsibility. Although legally football clubs are structured as any other business, football clubs have a far greater significance and meaning to most people than any other business. It therefore must be a priority for football regulators to make sure that football clubs are well managed and financially sound, so that they continue to provide joy and disappointment (in unequal measure) to their fans. Regulators also have a duty to ensure fair play, over and above the usual rules that govern competition between companies. To ensure that competition stays on the pitch and doesn’t retreat behind the closed doors of the boardroom, regulators must make rules to ensure clubs do not gain unfair and unsporting advantages over others. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, in order to execute these functions, a regulator must itself be fair. To preserve the integrity of the system, the regulator must be beyond reproach, and behave in a way which does not produce any suspicion that that they might be exercising their power unfairly, in favour of one team over another. THE SCOTTISH FOOTBALL ASSOCIATON: NOT FIT FOR FAIR PLAYOngoing court cases prevent comment on a number of aspects of Rangers’ liquidation, and the subsequent sale of the assets which allowed a team to play again at Ibrox. It may well be that the current criminal trial concerning some of the former directors of Rangers may bring out more regulatory failings. The two cases that are dealt with in the Offshore Game’s report however, which have nothing to do with the matter under consideration by the criminal court, call into question whether the SFA can be considered a fair and impartial regulator of Scottish football. This is a question that the SFA has, thus far, flatly refused to answer. And that itself points to a much bigger question: is the SFA an organisation capable of fixing itself and adopting the required standards of transparency, accountability and fairness that fans of Scottish football deserve? The evidence presented in this report does not amount to proof of corruption, and we do not allege corruption at the SFA. But the evidence does strongly suggest that the SFA is unable, if not actively unwilling, to ensure fair play. Major changes in personnel and governance structures will be necessary if the SFA is to show itself fit for purpose. The first step to restoring confidence would be for the SFA to engage with UEFA over the clearly misleading returns that Rangers submitted to them, in order to get a licence to play European football in 2011. Secondly there needs to be a fully independent inquiry, including substantial fan representation, to assess the role of the SFA and the actions of key, senior staff in respect of each issue outlined in this report; and with a mandate to learn from more accountable sports authorities in other fields and to recommend sweeping governance changes to the SFA if deemed necessary. Picture Credit StehLiverpool on Flickr http://www.theoffshoregame.net/475-2/
|
|
|
| |
|
Willie Wonka
|
16 Nov 2016, 06:42 PM
Post #9092
|
Slavery fled, oh glorious dead
- Posts:
- 27,523
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #615
- Joined:
- 9 February 2005
|
- Gothamcelt
- 16 Nov 2016, 06:32 PM
Alex Thomson has tweeted Time for an external inquiry into Scottish football governance? The offshore game have updated their original blog. DOING SFA FOR FAIR PLAY: A REPORT INTO THE RANGERS TAX AFFAIR AND THE ROLE OF THE SCOTTISH FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION
Spoiler: click to toggle BLOG MAY 5, 2016[/b] The Offshore Game’s new report into the Rangers tax affair shows just how a badly-run football association can undermine a level playing field – and what needs to be done about it. Here’s the short version… In 2012 Rangers were put into liquidation. One of the contributing factors to this was an offshore tax avoidance scheme that went (comprehensively and predictably) wrong. This new report looks at two questions that confronted Scottish football regulators, connected to the attempt by Rangers to escape from paying taxes on players wages. In both these questions we have found serious evidence of impropriety by the Scottish Football Association (SFA), which brings into question their ability to fairly manage competition in Scotland’s game. The analysis is based on multiple documents which we also republish here: those fully in the public domain such as court records, and a set of documents which had been leaked from Rangers over a period of time. The full report can be downloaded here. http://www.theoffshoregame.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Web-edition-Doing-SFA-for-Fair-Play-Main-report-updated.pdfThe annexes, which contain the documents used as the basis of our analysis, can be found here. ISSUE 1 – THE SPL INQUIRY INTO RULE BREAKING AT RANGERSThe first concerns the judge-led Commission set up by the Scottish Premier League (SPL) into alleged rule breaking by Rangers in the run up to their collapse. The Commission considered whether Rangers should be stripped of a series of league and cup titles. It is clear from the documents that the then President of the SFA, Campbell Ogilvie, misled the public and the judge presiding over the inquiry, which led them to make a material error of fact in their judgement. Specifically, Mr Ogilvie told the public and the inquiry that nothing to do with the payments to players through Employee Benefits Trusts fell within his role at Rangers. However, documentary evidence is clear that in fact Mr Ogilvie was a central figure in the establishment of the Discounted Options Scheme, which was a tax avoidance scheme that was part of the Rangers Employee Benefit Trust. The fact that Mr Ogilvie had previously been one of the longest serving officials in the history of Rangers Football Club clearly raises questions as to the motive behind his statements – since the inquiry’s own findings imply that, in full possession of the facts, they would have to have reached a different decision. Mr Ogilvie and the SFA did not respond to our requests for comment. ISSUE 2 – RANGERS’ LICENCE TO PLAY IN EUROPE 2011/2012The second issue concerns the grant and retention of a licence to play in Europe to Rangers in the 2011/12 season, when the finances of the club suggested it was on the verge of imminent collapse. UEFA rules are clear that in order to get a licence to play European football a club must prove that it has no overdue payables to tax authorities. Our analysis of the evidence shows that Rangers clearly had an overdue payable as defined in the UEFA rules and could not have met that test. However, regardless of this, the SFA did grant Rangers a licence. Although the SFA were informed by Rangers of an on-going issue concerning a large tax bill, they accepted Ranger’s erroneous argument that this did not break any UEFA rules. It appears that the SFA did little to test the explanation regarding the status of the bill given by Rangers, and subsequent correspondence reveals an unhealthy degree of co-ordination between Rangers and the SFA over the PR around the decision. As history unfolded, Rangers were knocked out before reaching the group stages of the Champion’s League. Had they managed to achieve victory in the qualifying rounds, they might well have gained the resources they needed to keep the club afloat and to pay the overdue tax bill based on Champions League income, thwarting the very purpose of UEFA FFP Articles in respect of overdue tax. Again, the fact that the SFA had done nothing to question the obvious issues in Rangers’ financial returns calls into question their effectiveness as a regulator. THE CRUCIAL ROLE OF SPORT REGULATORSIn sports, regulators have a particular responsibility. Although legally football clubs are structured as any other business, football clubs have a far greater significance and meaning to most people than any other business. It therefore must be a priority for football regulators to make sure that football clubs are well managed and financially sound, so that they continue to provide joy and disappointment (in unequal measure) to their fans. Regulators also have a duty to ensure fair play, over and above the usual rules that govern competition between companies. To ensure that competition stays on the pitch and doesn’t retreat behind the closed doors of the boardroom, regulators must make rules to ensure clubs do not gain unfair and unsporting advantages over others. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, in order to execute these functions, a regulator must itself be fair. To preserve the integrity of the system, the regulator must be beyond reproach, and behave in a way which does not produce any suspicion that that they might be exercising their power unfairly, in favour of one team over another. THE SCOTTISH FOOTBALL ASSOCIATON: NOT FIT FOR FAIR PLAYOngoing court cases prevent comment on a number of aspects of Rangers’ liquidation, and the subsequent sale of the assets which allowed a team to play again at Ibrox. It may well be that the current criminal trial concerning some of the former directors of Rangers may bring out more regulatory failings. The two cases that are dealt with in the Offshore Game’s report however, which have nothing to do with the matter under consideration by the criminal court, call into question whether the SFA can be considered a fair and impartial regulator of Scottish football. This is a question that the SFA has, thus far, flatly refused to answer. And that itself points to a much bigger question: is the SFA an organisation capable of fixing itself and adopting the required standards of transparency, accountability and fairness that fans of Scottish football deserve? The evidence presented in this report does not amount to proof of corruption, and we do not allege corruption at the SFA. But the evidence does strongly suggest that the SFA is unable, if not actively unwilling, to ensure fair play. Major changes in personnel and governance structures will be necessary if the SFA is to show itself fit for purpose. The first step to restoring confidence would be for the SFA to engage with UEFA over the clearly misleading returns that Rangers submitted to them, in order to get a licence to play European football in 2011. Secondly there needs to be a fully independent inquiry, including substantial fan representation, to assess the role of the SFA and the actions of key, senior staff in respect of each issue outlined in this report; and with a mandate to learn from more accountable sports authorities in other fields and to recommend sweeping governance changes to the SFA if deemed necessary. Picture Credit StehLiverpool on Flickr http://www.theoffshoregame.net/475-2/ Better if he gets it on the C4 news rather than twitter
|
|
|
| |
|
Torquemada
|
16 Nov 2016, 07:04 PM
Post #9093
|
Off treasure hunting in Holland
- Posts:
- 12,932
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #216
- Joined:
- 15 September 2004
|
- Gothamcelt
- 16 Nov 2016, 06:32 PM
Alex Thomson has tweeted Time for an external inquiry into Scottish football governance? The offshore game have updated their original blog. DOING SFA FOR FAIR PLAY: A REPORT INTO THE RANGERS TAX AFFAIR AND THE ROLE OF THE SCOTTISH FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION
Spoiler: click to toggle BLOG MAY 5, 2016[/b] The Offshore Game’s new report into the Rangers tax affair shows just how a badly-run football association can undermine a level playing field – and what needs to be done about it. Here’s the short version… In 2012 Rangers were put into liquidation. One of the contributing factors to this was an offshore tax avoidance scheme that went (comprehensively and predictably) wrong. This new report looks at two questions that confronted Scottish football regulators, connected to the attempt by Rangers to escape from paying taxes on players wages. In both these questions we have found serious evidence of impropriety by the Scottish Football Association (SFA), which brings into question their ability to fairly manage competition in Scotland’s game. The analysis is based on multiple documents which we also republish here: those fully in the public domain such as court records, and a set of documents which had been leaked from Rangers over a period of time. The full report can be downloaded here. http://www.theoffshoregame.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Web-edition-Doing-SFA-for-Fair-Play-Main-report-updated.pdfThe annexes, which contain the documents used as the basis of our analysis, can be found here. ISSUE 1 – THE SPL INQUIRY INTO RULE BREAKING AT RANGERSThe first concerns the judge-led Commission set up by the Scottish Premier League (SPL) into alleged rule breaking by Rangers in the run up to their collapse. The Commission considered whether Rangers should be stripped of a series of league and cup titles. It is clear from the documents that the then President of the SFA, Campbell Ogilvie, misled the public and the judge presiding over the inquiry, which led them to make a material error of fact in their judgement. Specifically, Mr Ogilvie told the public and the inquiry that nothing to do with the payments to players through Employee Benefits Trusts fell within his role at Rangers. However, documentary evidence is clear that in fact Mr Ogilvie was a central figure in the establishment of the Discounted Options Scheme, which was a tax avoidance scheme that was part of the Rangers Employee Benefit Trust. The fact that Mr Ogilvie had previously been one of the longest serving officials in the history of Rangers Football Club clearly raises questions as to the motive behind his statements – since the inquiry’s own findings imply that, in full possession of the facts, they would have to have reached a different decision. Mr Ogilvie and the SFA did not respond to our requests for comment. ISSUE 2 – RANGERS’ LICENCE TO PLAY IN EUROPE 2011/2012The second issue concerns the grant and retention of a licence to play in Europe to Rangers in the 2011/12 season, when the finances of the club suggested it was on the verge of imminent collapse. UEFA rules are clear that in order to get a licence to play European football a club must prove that it has no overdue payables to tax authorities. Our analysis of the evidence shows that Rangers clearly had an overdue payable as defined in the UEFA rules and could not have met that test. However, regardless of this, the SFA did grant Rangers a licence. Although the SFA were informed by Rangers of an on-going issue concerning a large tax bill, they accepted Ranger’s erroneous argument that this did not break any UEFA rules. It appears that the SFA did little to test the explanation regarding the status of the bill given by Rangers, and subsequent correspondence reveals an unhealthy degree of co-ordination between Rangers and the SFA over the PR around the decision. As history unfolded, Rangers were knocked out before reaching the group stages of the Champion’s League. Had they managed to achieve victory in the qualifying rounds, they might well have gained the resources they needed to keep the club afloat and to pay the overdue tax bill based on Champions League income, thwarting the very purpose of UEFA FFP Articles in respect of overdue tax. Again, the fact that the SFA had done nothing to question the obvious issues in Rangers’ financial returns calls into question their effectiveness as a regulator. THE CRUCIAL ROLE OF SPORT REGULATORSIn sports, regulators have a particular responsibility. Although legally football clubs are structured as any other business, football clubs have a far greater significance and meaning to most people than any other business. It therefore must be a priority for football regulators to make sure that football clubs are well managed and financially sound, so that they continue to provide joy and disappointment (in unequal measure) to their fans. Regulators also have a duty to ensure fair play, over and above the usual rules that govern competition between companies. To ensure that competition stays on the pitch and doesn’t retreat behind the closed doors of the boardroom, regulators must make rules to ensure clubs do not gain unfair and unsporting advantages over others. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, in order to execute these functions, a regulator must itself be fair. To preserve the integrity of the system, the regulator must be beyond reproach, and behave in a way which does not produce any suspicion that that they might be exercising their power unfairly, in favour of one team over another. THE SCOTTISH FOOTBALL ASSOCIATON: NOT FIT FOR FAIR PLAYOngoing court cases prevent comment on a number of aspects of Rangers’ liquidation, and the subsequent sale of the assets which allowed a team to play again at Ibrox. It may well be that the current criminal trial concerning some of the former directors of Rangers may bring out more regulatory failings. The two cases that are dealt with in the Offshore Game’s report however, which have nothing to do with the matter under consideration by the criminal court, call into question whether the SFA can be considered a fair and impartial regulator of Scottish football. This is a question that the SFA has, thus far, flatly refused to answer. And that itself points to a much bigger question: is the SFA an organisation capable of fixing itself and adopting the required standards of transparency, accountability and fairness that fans of Scottish football deserve? The evidence presented in this report does not amount to proof of corruption, and we do not allege corruption at the SFA. But the evidence does strongly suggest that the SFA is unable, if not actively unwilling, to ensure fair play. Major changes in personnel and governance structures will be necessary if the SFA is to show itself fit for purpose. The first step to restoring confidence would be for the SFA to engage with UEFA over the clearly misleading returns that Rangers submitted to them, in order to get a licence to play European football in 2011. Secondly there needs to be a fully independent inquiry, including substantial fan representation, to assess the role of the SFA and the actions of key, senior staff in respect of each issue outlined in this report; and with a mandate to learn from more accountable sports authorities in other fields and to recommend sweeping governance changes to the SFA if deemed necessary. Picture Credit StehLiverpool on Flickr http://www.theoffshoregame.net/475-2/ This reminds me of Andy Dufresne and his rock hammer. It might be slow and it might be laborious but one day this story will get out there and Ogilvie, Regan and Doncaster will see their brains splattered on the walls.
|
|
|
| |
|
kellybhoy
|
16 Nov 2016, 07:08 PM
Post #9094
|
- Posts:
- 12,084
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #3,529
- Joined:
- 4 April 2006
|
- cartuja
- 16 Nov 2016, 04:39 PM
- littlegmbhoy
- 16 Nov 2016, 04:38 PM
- cartuja
- 16 Nov 2016, 04:34 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Ta. Did Pistol sound serious..Sorry I sound like adog with a bone but like most on here thought they had agreed/ had already paid the damage. They were quick with us for banners, blow up squirrels etc. This one seems to have gone quiet? You think we will get them to pay then by his response?
See my edit above. I remember reading either on here or another forum that there has always been a "gentlemen's agreement" that in the event of property damage, the offending fan' club would quietly pay up, without fuss or publicity. This would explain Lawwell's vagueness on the subject.
Edit: I see a later post has pointed out that it is more than a gentlemen's agreement, it is in fact a clear rule of the SPFL.
|
|
|
| |
|
Wailer
|
16 Nov 2016, 07:14 PM
Post #9095
|
- Posts:
- 57,396
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #625
- Joined:
- 9 February 2005
- Favourite all-time player
- Larsson
|
If the huns don't pay for the damage then there's a simple resolution, don't let them back in or if we are obliged to give them something give them the bear bare minimum.
Edited by Wailer, 16 Nov 2016, 07:22 PM.
|
|
|
| |
|
littlegmbhoy
|
16 Nov 2016, 07:17 PM
Post #9096
|
- Posts:
- 4,261
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #34,917
- Joined:
- 20 June 2016
- Favourite all-time player
- Henke
|
- kellybhoy
- 16 Nov 2016, 07:08 PM
- cartuja
- 16 Nov 2016, 04:39 PM
- littlegmbhoy
- 16 Nov 2016, 04:38 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
See my edit above.
I remember reading either on here or another forum that there has always been a "gentlemen's agreement" that in the event of property damage, the offending fan' club would quietly pay up, without fuss or publicity. This would explain Lawwell's vagueness on the subject. Edit: I see a later post has pointed out that it is more than a gentlemen's agreement, it is in fact a clear rule of the SPFL. It seems it is however we are two months down the line no payment and pistols vague response indicates to me they are nt for paying or not confirming paying anything by now otherwise a more confirmed response from pistol today
|
|
|
| |
|
tonyjaa-csc
|
16 Nov 2016, 07:21 PM
Post #9097
|
- Posts:
- 56,372
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #4,990
- Joined:
- 21 September 2006
|
Whack Sabbath @BenTheTim Martyn Waghorn has an altercation with a schoolboy. Luckily Lee Wallace was there to film it.
Edit: wrong thread
|
|
|
| |
|
Mubo Loravcik
|
16 Nov 2016, 08:02 PM
Post #9098
|
Retired and now a BT Sports pundit
- Posts:
- 9,679
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #33,513
- Joined:
- 22 May 2014
- Favourite all-time player
- Lubo Moravcik (Henrik too easy a choice!)
|
- Hooped_Crusader
- 16 Nov 2016, 05:01 PM
Was at the game AGM today. Pretty boring affair, when things go well on the field the AGM is usually a tepid affair. All positive messages. Sterling work by the Celtic Foundation. MOTM goes to Arthur/Paul for his deadpan comedy routine. A few years in a row the +70yo has entertained the crowd. Most relevant question came from a Club 67/Celtic season tickets holder about the pricing of three match packages for the CL and for three games one of which was against Newfilth. Worst question was the guy moaning about lack of 'diversity' on the board. Tool. Diversity eh? Bloody socialists
|
|
|
| |
|
Hooped_Crusader
|
16 Nov 2016, 08:11 PM
Post #9099
|
- Posts:
- 2,569
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #1,727
- Joined:
- 30 July 2005
|
- Mubo Loravcik
- 16 Nov 2016, 08:02 PM
- Hooped_Crusader
- 16 Nov 2016, 05:01 PM
Was at the game AGM today. Pretty boring affair, when things go well on the field the AGM is usually a tepid affair. All positive messages. Sterling work by the Celtic Foundation. MOTM goes to Arthur/Paul for his deadpan comedy routine. A few years in a row the +70yo has entertained the crowd. Most relevant question came from a Club 67/Celtic season tickets holder about the pricing of three match packages for the CL and for three games one of which was against Newfilth. Worst question was the guy moaning about lack of 'diversity' on the board. Tool.
Diversity eh? Bloody socialists When it comes to Celtic I'm all about quality. The colour, creed, sex, whatever is totally irrelevant.
If it happens to be a bunch of local guys from Glasgow, I'll take it
|
|
|
| |
|
Fearghas
|
16 Nov 2016, 08:36 PM
Post #9100
|
- Posts:
- 2,647
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #34,269
- Joined:
- 4 July 2015
- Favourite all-time player
- Henke
- Twitter Name
- Fearghas73
|
- Hooped_Crusader
- 16 Nov 2016, 08:11 PM
- Mubo Loravcik
- 16 Nov 2016, 08:02 PM
- Hooped_Crusader
- 16 Nov 2016, 05:01 PM
Was at the game AGM today. Pretty boring affair, when things go well on the field the AGM is usually a tepid affair. All positive messages. Sterling work by the Celtic Foundation. MOTM goes to Arthur/Paul for his deadpan comedy routine. A few years in a row the +70yo has entertained the crowd. Most relevant question came from a Club 67/Celtic season tickets holder about the pricing of three match packages for the CL and for three games one of which was against Newfilth. Worst question was the guy moaning about lack of 'diversity' on the board. Tool.
Diversity eh? Bloody socialists
When it comes to Celtic I'm all about quality. The colour, creed, sex, whatever is totally irrelevant. If it happens to be a bunch of local guys from Glasgow, I'll take it call me a sexist if you want but i have to draw the line at having women in the squad.
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|