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 (1,414,496 Views)
Nisi Dominus Frustra
Member Avatar
Club Captain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Wee Ed KTF
7 Sep 2017, 11:04 PM
kewlcelt
7 Sep 2017, 10:43 PM
Am I missing something or is this the SFA trying to hang Sevco out to dry in some way with the wee case and the UEFA license by referring it to the compliance officer and trying to save their own arses over anything that might arise from the Other tax case?

Almost like they're hoping that gesture will appease and stop calls for any more to happen.

As pointed out by Dubz (above), the SFA's compliance officer would, by necessity, be investigating the involvement of King, Paul Murray, Alistair Johnston and Andrew Dickson in the granting of the UEFA license to Rangers IL in 2011

Cover for King et al to jump ship before the cash runs out and the cold-shoulder kicks in? Just about the right amount of bother to keep the titles and blame Timmy. :ponder:

Traynor typing it up as we speak. I'm too cynical. :nono:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
rightsaidted
First-team starter
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
The Bunnets bunnet
7 Sep 2017, 10:29 PM
fatboab
7 Sep 2017, 08:12 PM
moravcik67
7 Sep 2017, 08:09 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Yes you did. Inadvertently. And that number was...


0141 616 6004



I hope no one on here or other fans forums calls that number tomorrow.



Some poor lassie Sandra Buchanan - Be nice now folks
Was pretty certain none of the blazers had the guts to put up any direct line.
Poor Sandra is going to get the headache tomorrow deflecting our righteous anger.
Would someone who phones be kind enough to post the automated message they receive on here. Thanks.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Big Drew
Rio Fergus McCann CSC
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
SonOfBobo
7 Sep 2017, 11:06 PM
This is going somewhere. The huns are absolutely terrified.
If they didnt have the delusion of same club then they'd realise its nothing to do with their club. They've nothing to be stripped of.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wailer
Member Avatar
Rebel music.
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
rightsaidted
7 Sep 2017, 11:43 PM
The Bunnets bunnet
7 Sep 2017, 10:29 PM
fatboab
7 Sep 2017, 08:12 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepYes you did. Inadvertently. And that number was...


0141 616 6004



I hope no one on here or other fans forums calls that number tomorrow.



Some poor lassie Sandra Buchanan - Be nice now folks
Was pretty certain none of the blazers had the guts to put up any direct line.
Poor Sandra is going to get the headache tomorrow deflecting our righteous anger.
Would someone who phones be kind enough to post the automated message they receive on here. Thanks.
'This number has not been recognised'
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cartuja
Member Avatar
Working behind enemy lines
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Rangers' titles to be stripped? :ph43r:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Auldyin
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Thought I'd check on KDS comments.

:notmissingthis:

The universe is unfolding as it should.

Re events in 2011 there is no doubt RFC lied about status of liability at 31st March before CW took over and that CW continued with same lie to avoid UEFA enquiry.

No doubt.

What is not clear is how much the SFA were complict or negligent in their handling of the granting and monitoring duties.

Key date is 19 Sept 2011 when SFA and UEFA discussed the June submission under Article 66.

That led to UEFA verbally accepting the submission in spite of it borrowing on the same falsehood that allowed the licence to be granted.

Did someone at SFA lie to UEFA or just accept what he was told by RFC without checking with HMRC as he was empowered to do?

Stay Sharp on this and the advice provided to RFC on the next submission under Art67.

It's as if RFC were being coached.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jimmy_Quinn's_Hattrick
Member Avatar
First-team starter
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
“If the allegations of ‘double contracts’ for players are true, and a breach of SPL and/or SFA rules is established, the eligibility of those players to have competed in domestic league and cup competitions will be called into question,” Lawwell wrote in his letter, sent on May 25, 2012, the 45th anniversary of Celtic’s European Cup triumph.

“In turn, the integrity of the football results achieved by using those players would by necessity also fall into question. Any wrongdoing then established would have to be subject to fair and proportionate sanctions, including retrospectively, if appropriate.


That's a far harder line than I, and I think a lot of people, honestly expected the club to take. I'm very happy that my cynicism on this seems to be wrong.

The SFA's action - or lack thereof - is a blunt admission of a cover-up. They cannot reach the conclusion that a judicial review would "damage the reputation of Scottish football further" unless they know what it'll find. We're hitting Donald Jr levels of excuse-making now.
Edited by Jimmy_Quinn's_Hattrick, 8 Sep 2017, 01:13 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rickysrevenge
Member Avatar
Occasional Substitute
[ *  *  *  * ]
Must admit I was succumbing to the thought that 'been a month now the board will do feck all'

I am very pleasantly surprised
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Auldyin
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
blanco
7 Sep 2017, 07:43 PM
remy mcswain
7 Sep 2017, 07:28 PM
McLaughlin says Compliance officer looking at wee tax case and UEFA licence.
These were admitted by various Huns in the Craig Whyte trial so there should be no defence or any chance of avoiding punishment for those offences.

I can see the SFA hammering the Huns for the wee tax case and the res 12 stuff but hiding behind LNS for the big tax case and avoiding stripping those titles.
Unless SFA were aware in 2011 as they should have been and failed to satisfy The Offshore Game guys that the SFA had in its possession the HMRC tax demand dated 20th May 2011 that RFC should have supplied them with in 2011.

That demand suggested Rangers had acted fraudulently or negligently yet some how that information and circumstances of DOS ebts never reached the SPL lawyers.

In fact the Judicial Panel referred to in the PL letter to Regan of 2012 never charged anyone, Craig Whyte or Rangers before CW took over of failing to pay that tax. PAYE and VAT yes but not the wtc bill.

Why was that omitted from JP charges or not a separate charge against RFC? Fact is nothing prior to 6th May 2011 was investigated.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jimbo Jones
Member Avatar
Club Captain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
The SFA statement is ridiculous. They should be held to account for such nonsense. If there was wrong doing - from anyone - of the magnitude being claimed here, they should be keen to investigate to ensure something like this could never happen again. Instead, they make some spurious claim of not wanting to cause more harm to Scottish football's reputation. I'd say the exact opposite would happen if they don't investigate.

Our board and the other club's boards should come down on them like a ton of bricks.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MILLIGANS ISLAND
Member Avatar
....give us a glimmer......
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
The SFA are totally complicit,no surprise there will be no review. Especially with the other clubs staying silent.

Reading between the lines it looks like they might try and slap the huns on the wrist for the wee tax case as as sop thrown to lawwell to try and make this go away.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larbertbhoy
Member Avatar
Everyone's Fantasy Football first pick
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
MILLIGANS ISLAND
8 Sep 2017, 05:35 AM
The SFA are totally complicit,no surprise there will be no review. Especially with the other clubs staying silent.

Reading between the lines it looks like they might try and slap the huns on the wrist for the wee tax case as as sop thrown to lawwell to try and make this go away.
Hope the sheep turn that on wee mason Milne for the way he has capitulated.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Madrileno
Occasional Substitute
[ *  *  *  * ]
Jimbo Jones
8 Sep 2017, 04:32 AM
The SFA statement is ridiculous. They should be held to account for such nonsense. If there was wrong doing - from anyone - of the magnitude being claimed here, they should be keen to investigate to ensure something like this could never happen again. Instead, they make some spurious claim of not wanting to cause more harm to Scottish football's reputation. I'd say the exact opposite would happen if they don't investigate.

Our board and the other club's boards should come down on them like a ton of bricks.
The SFA are running scared from this as they're up to their necks in it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
idyllwild


Auldyin
8 Sep 2017, 12:23 AM
Thought I'd check on KDS comments.

:notmissingthis:

The universe is unfolding as it should.

Re events in 2011 there is no doubt RFC lied about status of liability at 31st March before CW took over and that CW continued with same lie to avoid UEFA enquiry.

No doubt.

What is not clear is how much the SFA were complict or negligent in their handling of the granting and monitoring duties.

Key date is 19 Sept 2011 when SFA and UEFA discussed the June submission under Article 66.

That led to UEFA verbally accepting the submission in spite of it borrowing on the same falsehood that allowed the licence to be granted.

Did someone at SFA lie to UEFA or just accept what he was told by RFC without checking with HMRC as he was empowered to do?

Stay Sharp on this and the advice provided to RFC on the next submission under Art67.

It's as if RFC were being coached.
I see what you did there. :ph43r:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
steviefrombelfast
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Auldyin
8 Sep 2017, 12:23 AM
Thought I'd check on KDS comments.

:notmissingthis:

The universe is unfolding as it should.

Re events in 2011 there is no doubt RFC lied about status of liability at 31st March before CW took over and that CW continued with same lie to avoid UEFA enquiry.

No doubt.

What is not clear is how much the SFA were complict or negligent in their handling of the granting and monitoring duties.

Key date is 19 Sept 2011 when SFA and UEFA discussed the June submission under Article 66.

That led to UEFA verbally accepting the submission in spite of it borrowing on the same falsehood that allowed the licence to be granted.

Did someone at SFA lie to UEFA or just accept what he was told by RFC without checking with HMRC as he was empowered to do?

Stay Sharp on this and the advice provided to RFC on the next submission under Art67.

It's as if RFC were being coached.
Re your assertion that the key date was September 2011. Am I right in suggesting then that the line the SFA could take is that it the post April 2011 lies that really mattered? I.e. it was all Craig whytes fault?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mickeybhoy84
Member Avatar
Living the dream
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
If they're looking at the UEFA licensing issue would that mean UEFA automatically become involved? At the very least you'd imagine they'll be keeping a very close eye on proceedings. As corrupt as they are they don't have a dog in this fight and having someone neutral overseeing things could swing things in favour of justice actually being done.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Speedy Gonzales
Member Avatar
Everyone's Fantasy Football first pick
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
idyllwild
8 Sep 2017, 07:06 AM
Auldyin
8 Sep 2017, 12:23 AM
Thought I'd check on KDS comments.

:notmissingthis:

The universe is unfolding as it should.

Re events in 2011 there is no doubt RFC lied about status of liability at 31st March before CW took over and that CW continued with same lie to avoid UEFA enquiry.

No doubt.

What is not clear is how much the SFA were complict or negligent in their handling of the granting and monitoring duties.

Key date is 19 Sept 2011 when SFA and UEFA discussed the June submission under Article 66.

That led to UEFA verbally accepting the submission in spite of it borrowing on the same falsehood that allowed the licence to be granted.

Did someone at SFA lie to UEFA or just accept what he was told by RFC without checking with HMRC as he was empowered to do?

Stay Sharp on this and the advice provided to RFC on the next submission under Art67.

It's as if RFC were being coached.
I see what you did there. :ph43r:
Not sure I do though.

But then I'm not the Sharpest(??) tool in the box.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tiny Tim
Member Avatar
"a Premier League player in all but status"
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Auldyin
8 Sep 2017, 12:23 AM
Thought I'd check on KDS comments.

:notmissingthis:

The universe is unfolding as it should.

Re events in 2011 there is no doubt RFC lied about status of liability at 31st March before CW took over and that CW continued with same lie to avoid UEFA enquiry.

No doubt.

What is not clear is how much the SFA were complict or negligent in their handling of the granting and monitoring duties.

Key date is 19 Sept 2011 when SFA and UEFA discussed the June submission under Article 66.

That led to UEFA verbally accepting the submission in spite of it borrowing on the same falsehood that allowed the licence to be granted.

Did someone at SFA lie to UEFA or just accept what he was told by RFC without checking with HMRC as he was empowered to do?

Stay Sharp on this and the advice provided to RFC on the next submission under Art67.

It's as if RFC were being coached.
I'm picturing you sitting back in a big, comfy armchair, sipping a fine old single malt and puffing on a Havana cigar as you type that...
:worthy:
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
qualitystreetkid
Member Avatar
Thank you, bye-bye for calling
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
It should be astonishing that after so many years of misfeasance, misconduct and general wrongdoing the SFA now have the balls to intimate their delinquency but decide no investigation is required ... but it's really not astonishing at all, it's not even mildly surprising
Edited by qualitystreetkid, 8 Sep 2017, 08:12 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MILLIGANS ISLAND
Member Avatar
....give us a glimmer......
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
qualitystreetkid
8 Sep 2017, 08:11 AM
It should be astonishing that after so many years of misfeasance, misconduct and general wrongdoing the SFA now have the balls to intimate their delinquency but decide no investigation is required ... but it's really not astonishing at all, it's not even mildly surprising
Its utterly incredible. It really is.

The sheer brass neck of these carrots is breathtaking.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Celtic Football Club Discussion Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply