|
The Board - general discussion (including Res 12); notes from the AGM
|
|
Topic Started: 15 Jul 2014, 12:03 AM (1,414,453 Views)
|
|
ronny_is_not_da_man
|
12 Sep 2017, 02:36 PM
Post #11361
|
Off treasure hunting in Holland
- Posts:
- 12,151
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #34,169
- Joined:
- 14 May 2015
- Favourite all-time player
- Henke
|
- BardseyCelt
- 12 Sep 2017, 02:34 PM
- ronny_is_not_da_man
- 12 Sep 2017, 02:33 PM
- BardseyCelt
- 12 Sep 2017, 02:31 PM
Face like his wife has caught him trying on her pants.
Spoken like a true expert
Joke's on you, we're not married.
|
|
|
| |
|
puroresu_boy
|
12 Sep 2017, 02:52 PM
Post #11362
|
- Posts:
- 1,207
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #35,442
- Joined:
- 8 February 2017
- Favourite all-time player
- Henrik Larsson
|
- Ned Rise
- 12 Sep 2017, 02:08 PM
East Stirling kicked out of Scottish Cup over ineligible player (2011)
Dunfermline kicked out of Scottish Cup for 'breaches of competition rules' (two ineligible players - 2010)
Spartans thrown out of Scottish Cup over ineligible player mistake (2011)
Albion Rovers thrown out of cup for ineligible player (2017)
Brechin booted out of Scottish Cup (two ineligible players, 2008)
Did the SFA require emails or phone calls from any members clubs, never mind the majority of them, before they felt obliged to act in any of the above cases?
They haven't done their job, so they are obliged to answer our concerns, as their failure affects us.
If that means having to do uncomfortable interviews (Don Vincenzo Coccotti would have had a field day) then that's tough luck.
We beat them over the great flag flutter, the Jorge Cadete incident, the Dougiegate scandal and we'll beat them over this. They're in the wrong and they know it.
I notice not one journalist likes to mention those rule breaches and punishments to Regan.
|
|
|
| |
|
pads99
|
12 Sep 2017, 03:01 PM
Post #11363
|
- Posts:
- 4,114
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #24,491
- Joined:
- 23 September 2009
|
- Fortune Teller
- 12 Sep 2017, 01:13 PM
Link- Quote:
-
The Rangers row threatening to drown out all else in Scottish football
A silent majority no longer care about the Rangers affair but dare to suggest this topic has little relevance in 2017 and you are accused of being part of the problem
Ewan Murray
@mrewanmurray
Tuesday 12 September 2017 12.51 BST
If the Scottish Football Association is anxious regarding the latest, stinging criticism of its governance then such fear is well hidden. By close of business on another of Scottish football’s manic Mondays, focus had firmly shifted towards another of the game’s legislators.
The SFA’s chief executive, Stewart Regan, met the media in reply to an insistence from the Scottish Professional Football League that a “fully independent review” must be held to investigate football governance issues surrounding the 2012 liquidation of Rangers and the club’s use of Employee Benefit Trusts.
The issue has gained significant public traction as letters from Celtic’s chief executive, Peter Lawwell, urging the SFA to agree to such a review, entered the public domain. The undertone is that Scottish football’s ruling body was at best negligent as the Rangers saga played out.
Regan is adamant no such project need be undertaken. He looks and sounds comfortable with his position. The EBT scenario flew back into public consciousness as a supreme court judgment assessed that tax was payable by those Rangers players and officials who earned via the scheme between 2001 and 2010. Regan believes any review would be pointless and that those with a grievance relating to the SFA’s handling of all things Rangers will never be placated.
“Since 2011 the board have relied heavily on advice from four QCs and three law lords, supporting us on that journey,” said Regan of legislative steps and punishments implemented in relation to Rangers. “We also have two independent directors on our board. Independence has been at the heart of everything we have done.
“I think it would be really difficult to convince those who believe in conspiracies that there isn’t a conspiracy at play. My pushback to them is do we really think that four QCs, three law lords, all the club execs, all the independent panel members are all part of some huge conspiracy?
“We have to be able to move on. We won’t get closure in the eyes of some parts of Scottish football – some fans, some stakeholders – we won’t ever get closure. This will be one of those topics that will be talked about for years and years to come. There isn’t a right or a wrong answer; it’s a judgment call and a group of guys around the boardroom table with independent legal scrutiny have come to the conclusion that this is where we draw a line.”
The SFA has, it must be noted, opted to take a closer look at the award of a European licence to Rangers in 2011 after information was revealed during the trial of the club’s former owner Craig Whyte. If it is proven that Rangers misled the SFA in an attempt to earn that Champions League qualifying place, the sanction should be serious. Should, though, is the operative term; the SFA did not even have it within its power to penalise clubs for a mass on-field riot at the conclusion of the 2016 Scottish Cup final.
Lawwell finds himself in an invidious position. A noisy element of the Celtic support refuse to let the issue of Rangers and their demise go away. That group, naturally, would be seriously disappointed if the chief executive of their own club refused to fight on their behalf. If Lawwell believes an investigation is now his best hope of delivering something tangible, his attitude is understandable. He can at the very least say he tried.
“I have a lot of respect for Peter Lawwell,” Regan said. “I was with him at the Champions League draw a couple of weeks ago and we have a very good relationship. I’d do exactly the same in his position – he is looking out for the best interests of Celtic Football Club.”
The notion that fans across Scotland remain enraged by Rangers’ antics and by the approach of officialdom towards that issue is continually overplayed. The reality, one people refuse to accept, is that a silent majority of those who attend matches week on week no longer care about this affair. They grew tired of it long ago, after chuckling as Rangers played domestic fixtures at Albion Rovers and Cowdenbeath. But dare to suggest this topic has little relevance in 2017 and you are accused of being part of the problem.
Rangers’ current fury is towards the SPFL’s chief executive, Neil Doncaster, who penned a letter to the SFA under the title: “Independent review of use of tax avoidance schemes at Rangers FC and actions of Scottish football authorities.”
The Ibrox club are adamant the SPFL board, upon which their managing director Stewart Robertson sits, agreed to undertake no such thing. A process of how circumstances even remotely similar to 2012 would be handled in future, yes, but not essentially another investigation into the EBT years. Semantics, perhaps, but important ones.
The SPFL’s 42 members were referenced in Lawwell’s correspondence; the 42 are also members of the SFA. Aberdeen’s chairman, Stewart Milne, has been consistently vocal with his belief that reviews would do more harm than good. Billy Bowie, Kilmarnock’s majority shareholder, has offered the same message.
“We haven’t had a single email, phone call or letter – other than from Celtic – asking us to have a look at this,” added Regan. “I thought it would be worthwhile to go back out and ask our members: ‘Are you sure … is there anything you want looked at?’ I told them the rationale to our decision in a letter last week. I haven’t had a single response asking for clarification.”
Hibernian’s chairman, Rod Petrie, is also a vice-president of the SFA, which is perhaps pertinent in respect of their statement distancing themselves from the SPFL’s stance by Monday evening. That said, the basic notion of “independence” in the context of an inquiry is arguably undermined by Regan and Petrie – such prominent SFA figures – being in position to veto.
Suddenly, Doncaster’s letter looked a curious piece of work. Why on earth did the SPFL’s chief executive pen it when member clubs, and prominent ones at that, would be immediately willing to take an alternative stance? In a statement on Monday evening the SPFL pointed only to its board approving the call for an inquiry. For such an important issue, surely all 42 clubs should have been consulted to avoid what has regressed into a public relations disaster.
The SPFL itself did not reply to a direct question as to how many clubs actually support a call for a fully independent review. And yet, it seems at best bizarre that Doncaster would approach the SFA without sufficient backing. Perhaps, given Celtic’s size and status, they have every right to push on their own. By very definition, they were the club most affected by Rangers’ EBT use. Maybe Doncaster was seeking to put the focus on the SFA when, in reality, the consequence has been altogether different.
On Tuesday evening Celtic will host Paris Saint-Germain against the inevitable backdrop of an almighty din. It is a noise matched elsewhere.
From a newspaper that has the great David Conn and other journalist writing about corruption in the game from FIFA that is a complete disgrace.
|
|
|
| |
|
suzieghirl10
|
12 Sep 2017, 03:27 PM
Post #11364
|
Everyone's Fantasy Football first pick
- Posts:
- 2,370
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34,972
- Joined:
- 16 July 2016
- Favourite all-time player
- Henrik Larsson
|
Ewan Murray is an arsehole. Ignore.
|
|
|
| |
|
Jack Thaler
|
12 Sep 2017, 03:37 PM
Post #11365
|
- Posts:
- 5,545
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #32,503
- Joined:
- 10 May 2013
- Favourite all-time player
- Henrik Larsson
- Twitter Name
- @E_JackThaler
|
Silent Majority
|
|
|
| |
|
Jimmy_Quinn's_Hattrick
|
12 Sep 2017, 03:46 PM
Post #11366
|
- Posts:
- 1,042
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #35,592
- Joined:
- 3 May 2017
- Favourite all-time player
- Henrik Larsson
|
- Jack Thaler
- 12 Sep 2017, 03:37 PM
Silent Majority It's one of those "the person saying this is a massive carrot" phrases, isn't it?
|
|
|
| |
|
SwavBhoy
|
12 Sep 2017, 03:47 PM
Post #11367
|
- Posts:
- 5,539
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #28,127
- Joined:
- 7 March 2011
- Favourite all-time player
- The King
|
- tarff26
- 12 Sep 2017, 02:30 PM
- shugmc
- 12 Sep 2017, 02:08 PM
- Fortune Teller
- 12 Sep 2017, 01:13 PM
LinkQuoting limited to 3 levels deep Pish @mrewanmurray
Tuesday 12 September 2017 12.51 BST
If the Scottish Football Association is anxious regarding the latest, stinging criticism of its governance then such fear is well hidden. By close of business on another of Scottish football’s manic Mondays, focus had firmly shifted towards another of the game’s legislators.
The SFA’s chief executive, Stewart Regan, met the media in reply to an insistence from the Scottish Professional Football League that a “fully independent review” must be held to investigate football governance issues surrounding the 2012 liquidation of Rangers and the club’s use of Employee Benefit Trusts.
The issue has gained significant public traction as letters from Celtic’s chief executive, Peter Lawwell, urging the SFA to agree to such a review, entered the public domain. The undertone is that Scottish football’s ruling body was at best negligent as the Rangers saga played out.
Regan is adamant no such project need be undertaken. He looks and sounds comfortable with his position. The EBT scenario flew back into public consciousness as a supreme court judgment assessed that tax was payable by those Rangers players and officials who earned via the scheme between 2001 and 2010. Regan believes any review would be pointless and that those with a grievance relating to the SFA’s handling of all things Rangers will never be placated.
“Since 2011 the board have relied heavily on advice from four QCs and three law lords, supporting us on that journey,” said Regan of legislative steps and punishments implemented in relation to Rangers. “We also have two independent directors on our board. Independence has been at the heart of everything we have done.
“I think it would be really difficult to convince those who believe in conspiracies that there isn’t a conspiracy at play. My pushback to them is do we really think that four QCs, three law lords, all the club execs, all the independent panel members are all part of some huge conspiracy?
“We have to be able to move on. We won’t get closure in the eyes of some parts of Scottish football – some fans, some stakeholders – we won’t ever get closure. This will be one of those topics that will be talked about for years and years to come. There isn’t a right or a wrong answer; it’s a judgment call and a group of guys around the boardroom table with independent legal scrutiny have come to the conclusion that this is where we draw a line.”
The SFA has, it must be noted, opted to take a closer look at the award of a European licence to Rangers in 2011 after information was revealed during the trial of the club’s former owner Craig Whyte. If it is proven that Rangers misled the SFA in an attempt to earn that Champions League qualifying place, the sanction should be serious. Should, though, is the operative term; the SFA did not even have it within its power to penalise clubs for a mass on-field riot at the conclusion of the 2016 Scottish Cup final.
Lawwell finds himself in an invidious position. A noisy element of the Celtic support refuse to let the issue of Rangers and their demise go away. That group, naturally, would be seriously disappointed if the chief executive of their own club refused to fight on their behalf. If Lawwell believes an investigation is now his best hope of delivering something tangible, his attitude is understandable. He can at the very least say he tried.
“I have a lot of respect for Peter Lawwell,” Regan said. “I was with him at the Champions League draw a couple of weeks ago and we have a very good relationship. I’d do exactly the same in his position – he is looking out for the best interests of Celtic Football Club.”
The notion that fans across Scotland remain enraged by Rangers’ antics and by the approach of officialdom towards that issue is continually overplayed. The reality, one people refuse to accept, is that a silent majority of those who attend matches week on week no longer care about this affair. They grew tired of it long ago, after chuckling as Rangers played domestic fixtures at Albion Rovers and Cowdenbeath. But dare to suggest this topic has little relevance in 2017 and you are accused of being part of the problem.
Rangers’ current fury is towards the SPFL’s chief executive, Neil Doncaster, who penned a letter to the SFA under the title: “Independent review of use of tax avoidance schemes at Rangers FC and actions of Scottish football authorities.”
The Ibrox club are adamant the SPFL board, upon which their managing director Stewart Robertson sits, agreed to undertake no such thing. A process of how circumstances even remotely similar to 2012 would be handled in future, yes, but not essentially another investigation into the EBT years. Semantics, perhaps, but important ones.
The SPFL’s 42 members were referenced in Lawwell’s correspondence; the 42 are also members of the SFA. Aberdeen’s chairman, Stewart Milne, has been consistently vocal with his belief that reviews would do more harm than good. Billy Bowie, Kilmarnock’s majority shareholder, has offered the same message.
“We haven’t had a single email, phone call or letter – other than from Celtic – asking us to have a look at this,” added Regan. “I thought it would be worthwhile to go back out and ask our members: ‘Are you sure … is there anything you want looked at?’ I told them the rationale to our decision in a letter last week. I haven’t had a single response asking for clarification.”
Hibernian’s chairman, Rod Petrie, is also a vice-president of the SFA, which is perhaps pertinent in respect of their statement distancing themselves from the SPFL’s stance by Monday evening. That said, the basic notion of “independence” in the context of an inquiry is arguably undermined by Regan and Petrie – such prominent SFA figures – being in position to veto.
Suddenly, Doncaster’s letter looked a curious piece of work. Why on earth did the SPFL’s chief executive pen it when member clubs, and prominent ones at that, would be immediately willing to take an alternative stance? In a statement on Monday evening the SPFL pointed only to its board approving the call for an inquiry. For such an important issue, surely all 42 clubs should have been consulted to avoid what has regressed into a public relations disaster.
The SPFL itself did not reply to a direct question as to how many clubs actually support a call for a fully independent review. And yet, it seems at best bizarre that Doncaster would approach the SFA without sufficient backing. Perhaps, given Celtic’s size and status, they have every right to push on their own. By very definition, they were the club most affected by Rangers’ EBT use. Maybe Doncaster was seeking to put the focus on the SFA when, in reality, the consequence has been altogether different.
On Tuesday evening Celtic will host Paris Saint-Germain against the inevitable backdrop of an almighty din. It is a noise matched elsewhere.
 State of that 
And that's the best photo they got of him A bit of the David Walliam's about him.
He's a whinging cock, that should stick to writing about golf.
|
|
|
| |
|
Bodom Bhoy
|
12 Sep 2017, 03:50 PM
Post #11368
|
- Posts:
- 20,993
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #28,474
- Joined:
- 21 April 2011
|
Silent majority and small minority are two sides of the same hun phrase coin.
|
|
|
| |
|
johnny88
|
12 Sep 2017, 03:55 PM
Post #11369
|
- Posts:
- 1,144
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34,248
- Joined:
- 23 June 2015
- Favourite all-time player
- Henke
|
- Jack Thaler
- 12 Sep 2017, 03:37 PM
Silent Majority How can one know what the majority thinks if they are silent?
Edited by johnny88, 12 Sep 2017, 04:00 PM.
|
|
|
| |
|
MONSTER
|
12 Sep 2017, 04:11 PM
Post #11370
|
Retired and now a BT Sports pundit
- Posts:
- 9,037
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #3,192
- Joined:
- 23 February 2006
|
- ronny_is_not_da_man
- 12 Sep 2017, 02:33 PM
- BardseyCelt
- 12 Sep 2017, 02:31 PM
Face like his wife has caught him trying on her pants.
Spoken like a true expert Sniff sniff
|
|
|
| |
|
justinjest
|
12 Sep 2017, 04:23 PM
Post #11371
|
- Posts:
- 3,780
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #30,913
- Joined:
- 16 May 2012
|
I knew this was going to get messy, I knew the rest of Scottish football wouldn't back us (I knew the fans of other clubs would, but the chairmen wouldn't), I knew the media wouldn't back us and I don't believe PL and the board thought any differently, they knew this was a fight that we'd have to win ourselves, so nothing's changed. We're in this until we win.
|
|
|
| |
|
lenobhoy
|
12 Sep 2017, 04:26 PM
Post #11372
|
Catch some light and it'll be alright
- Posts:
- 26,056
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #333
- Joined:
- 4 November 2004
|
- johnny88
- 12 Sep 2017, 03:55 PM
- Jack Thaler
- 12 Sep 2017, 03:37 PM
Silent Majority
How can one know what the majority thinks if they are silent? Through the medium of interpretive mime.
Edited by lenobhoy, 12 Sep 2017, 04:26 PM.
|
|
|
| |
|
Fearghas
|
12 Sep 2017, 05:19 PM
Post #11373
|
- Posts:
- 2,647
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #34,269
- Joined:
- 4 July 2015
- Favourite all-time player
- Henke
- Twitter Name
- Fearghas73
|
- Ned Rise
- 12 Sep 2017, 02:08 PM
East Stirling kicked out of Scottish Cup over ineligible player (2011)
Dunfermline kicked out of Scottish Cup for 'breaches of competition rules' (two ineligible players - 2010)
Spartans thrown out of Scottish Cup over ineligible player mistake (2011)
Albion Rovers thrown out of cup for ineligible player (2017)
Brechin booted out of Scottish Cup (two ineligible players, 2008)
Did the SFA require emails or phone calls from any members clubs, never mind the majority of them, before they felt obliged to act in any of the above cases?
They haven't done their job, so they are obliged to answer our concerns, as their failure affects us.
If that means having to do uncomfortable interviews (Don Vincenzo Coccotti would have had a field day) then that's tough luck.
We beat them over the great flag flutter, the Jorge Cadete incident, the Dougiegate scandal and we'll beat them over this. They're in the wrong and they know it.
someone should phone ssb with these points
|
|
|
| |
|
Fearghas
|
12 Sep 2017, 05:22 PM
Post #11374
|
- Posts:
- 2,647
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #34,269
- Joined:
- 4 July 2015
- Favourite all-time player
- Henke
- Twitter Name
- Fearghas73
|
- BardseyCelt
- 12 Sep 2017, 02:34 PM
- ronny_is_not_da_man
- 12 Sep 2017, 02:33 PM
- BardseyCelt
- 12 Sep 2017, 02:31 PM
Face like his wife has caught him trying on her pants.
Spoken like a true expert
Joke's on you, we're not married.
|
|
|
| |
|
Dhogtanian
|
12 Sep 2017, 05:26 PM
Post #11375
|
Retired and now an out of work Setanta pundit looking for a job at ESPN or Sky. Or BEIN or BT Sport!
- Posts:
- 19,534
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #191
- Joined:
- 9 September 2004
|
So what happens next?
|
|
|
| |
|
Otis B Driftwood
|
12 Sep 2017, 05:27 PM
Post #11376
|
Satisfaction came in a chain reaction
- Posts:
- 16,158
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #25,838
- Joined:
- 6 April 2010
- Favourite all-time player
- Jimmy Johnstone
|
- MONSTER
- 12 Sep 2017, 04:11 PM
- ronny_is_not_da_man
- 12 Sep 2017, 02:33 PM
- BardseyCelt
- 12 Sep 2017, 02:31 PM
Face like his wife has caught him trying on her pants.
Spoken like a true expert
Sniff sniff That's a different perversion entirely.
|
|
|
| |
|
stevenagebhoy
|
12 Sep 2017, 06:25 PM
Post #11377
|
- Posts:
- 657
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #30,994
- Joined:
- 26 May 2012
- Favourite all-time player
- Henrik Larsson
|
- van Doesburg
- 12 Sep 2017, 09:54 AM
"Apart from one [club] I haven't had a single phone call, email or letter on this subject,": Stewart Regan quoted here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/scotland/41228081Think this needs to be remedied, but also think it would need an organised and concerted campaign to have any effect. Anyone aware of any plans afoot to encourage fans to pressure the SFA directly? So want the carrot is saying is that if every house in the road gets burgled but only one householder phones the police then the theft doesn't need to to be investigated.
GTF with that Regan, you corrupt inept twat.
|
|
|
| |
|
el gato
|
12 Sep 2017, 06:26 PM
Post #11378
|
- Posts:
- 5,599
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #24,911
- Joined:
- 8 December 2009
- Favourite all-time player
- paul elliot
|
- shugmc
- 12 Sep 2017, 02:08 PM
- Fortune Teller
- 12 Sep 2017, 01:13 PM
Link- Quote:
-
The Rangers row threatening to drown out all else in Scottish football A silent majority no longer care about the Rangers affair but dare to suggest this topic has little relevance in 2017 and you are accused of being part of the problem Ewan Murray Pish @mrewanmurray
Tuesday 12 September 2017 12.51 BST
If the Scottish Football Association is anxious regarding the latest, stinging criticism of its governance then such fear is well hidden. By close of business on another of Scottish football’s manic Mondays, focus had firmly shifted towards another of the game’s legislators.
The SFA’s chief executive, Stewart Regan, met the media in reply to an insistence from the Scottish Professional Football League that a “fully independent review” must be held to investigate football governance issues surrounding the 2012 liquidation of Rangers and the club’s use of Employee Benefit Trusts.
The issue has gained significant public traction as letters from Celtic’s chief executive, Peter Lawwell, urging the SFA to agree to such a review, entered the public domain. The undertone is that Scottish football’s ruling body was at best negligent as the Rangers saga played out.
Regan is adamant no such project need be undertaken. He looks and sounds comfortable with his position. The EBT scenario flew back into public consciousness as a supreme court judgment assessed that tax was payable by those Rangers players and officials who earned via the scheme between 2001 and 2010. Regan believes any review would be pointless and that those with a grievance relating to the SFA’s handling of all things Rangers will never be placated.
“Since 2011 the board have relied heavily on advice from four QCs and three law lords, supporting us on that journey,” said Regan of legislative steps and punishments implemented in relation to Rangers. “We also have two independent directors on our board. Independence has been at the heart of everything we have done.
“I think it would be really difficult to convince those who believe in conspiracies that there isn’t a conspiracy at play. My pushback to them is do we really think that four QCs, three law lords, all the club execs, all the independent panel members are all part of some huge conspiracy?
“We have to be able to move on. We won’t get closure in the eyes of some parts of Scottish football – some fans, some stakeholders – we won’t ever get closure. This will be one of those topics that will be talked about for years and years to come. There isn’t a right or a wrong answer; it’s a judgment call and a group of guys around the boardroom table with independent legal scrutiny have come to the conclusion that this is where we draw a line.”
The SFA has, it must be noted, opted to take a closer look at the award of a European licence to Rangers in 2011 after information was revealed during the trial of the club’s former owner Craig Whyte. If it is proven that Rangers misled the SFA in an attempt to earn that Champions League qualifying place, the sanction should be serious. Should, though, is the operative term; the SFA did not even have it within its power to penalise clubs for a mass on-field riot at the conclusion of the 2016 Scottish Cup final.
Lawwell finds himself in an invidious position. A noisy element of the Celtic support refuse to let the issue of Rangers and their demise go away. That group, naturally, would be seriously disappointed if the chief executive of their own club refused to fight on their behalf. If Lawwell believes an investigation is now his best hope of delivering something tangible, his attitude is understandable. He can at the very least say he tried.
“I have a lot of respect for Peter Lawwell,” Regan said. “I was with him at the Champions League draw a couple of weeks ago and we have a very good relationship. I’d do exactly the same in his position – he is looking out for the best interests of Celtic Football Club.”
The notion that fans across Scotland remain enraged by Rangers’ antics and by the approach of officialdom towards that issue is continually overplayed. The reality, one people refuse to accept, is that a silent majority of those who attend matches week on week no longer care about this affair. They grew tired of it long ago, after chuckling as Rangers played domestic fixtures at Albion Rovers and Cowdenbeath. But dare to suggest this topic has little relevance in 2017 and you are accused of being part of the problem.
Rangers’ current fury is towards the SPFL’s chief executive, Neil Doncaster, who penned a letter to the SFA under the title: “Independent review of use of tax avoidance schemes at Rangers FC and actions of Scottish football authorities.”
The Ibrox club are adamant the SPFL board, upon which their managing director Stewart Robertson sits, agreed to undertake no such thing. A process of how circumstances even remotely similar to 2012 would be handled in future, yes, but not essentially another investigation into the EBT years. Semantics, perhaps, but important ones.
The SPFL’s 42 members were referenced in Lawwell’s correspondence; the 42 are also members of the SFA. Aberdeen’s chairman, Stewart Milne, has been consistently vocal with his belief that reviews would do more harm than good. Billy Bowie, Kilmarnock’s majority shareholder, has offered the same message.
“We haven’t had a single email, phone call or letter – other than from Celtic – asking us to have a look at this,” added Regan. “I thought it would be worthwhile to go back out and ask our members: ‘Are you sure … is there anything you want looked at?’ I told them the rationale to our decision in a letter last week. I haven’t had a single response asking for clarification.”
Hibernian’s chairman, Rod Petrie, is also a vice-president of the SFA, which is perhaps pertinent in respect of their statement distancing themselves from the SPFL’s stance by Monday evening. That said, the basic notion of “independence” in the context of an inquiry is arguably undermined by Regan and Petrie – such prominent SFA figures – being in position to veto.
Suddenly, Doncaster’s letter looked a curious piece of work. Why on earth did the SPFL’s chief executive pen it when member clubs, and prominent ones at that, would be immediately willing to take an alternative stance? In a statement on Monday evening the SPFL pointed only to its board approving the call for an inquiry. For such an important issue, surely all 42 clubs should have been consulted to avoid what has regressed into a public relations disaster.
The SPFL itself did not reply to a direct question as to how many clubs actually support a call for a fully independent review. And yet, it seems at best bizarre that Doncaster would approach the SFA without sufficient backing. Perhaps, given Celtic’s size and status, they have every right to push on their own. By very definition, they were the club most affected by Rangers’ EBT use. Maybe Doncaster was seeking to put the focus on the SFA when, in reality, the consequence has been altogether different.
On Tuesday evening Celtic will host Paris Saint-Germain against the inevitable backdrop of an almighty din. It is a noise matched elsewhere.
 State of that  Suits you Sir
|
|
|
| |
|
tommybhoy87
|
12 Sep 2017, 06:28 PM
Post #11379
|
- Posts:
- 561
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #33,940
- Joined:
- 23 January 2015
- Favourite all-time player
- Larsson
|
Regan reminds me of Doc Daneeka in Catch 22 - constantly feeling threatened, a liar and drafted against his will, but all he wants to do is appease his superiors who hold the key to his success because the rest of his competitors are taken out the game. He needs to record flight time, so he gets others to forge documents in his name, recording false flight data.
He's constantly intercepted by soldiers looking for medical lines to avoid flying duties but responds with "get me in my office", but he's never in his office (spot the similarities).
In the end his chicanery is his own downfall after one of the pilots are downed with him "onboard":
- Quote:
-
He tries to convince his wife that he is not dead, but fails
"It's me, Stewart"
|
|
|
| |
|
weebaldy
|
12 Sep 2017, 06:41 PM
Post #11380
|
We Won the Big One-They Never Will!
- Posts:
- 2,229
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #28,009
- Joined:
- 22 February 2011
|
- Torquemada
- 12 Sep 2017, 12:57 PM
- weebaldy
- 12 Sep 2017, 10:23 AM
- timbojon
- 12 Sep 2017, 10:07 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Yep, unlike the Kelly regime, the bunnett wasn't afraid to take on those cheating carrots at the SFA  The wee man should have a statue for what he did for our club
Very unfair to Bob Kelly. He faced down the bigoted bastards over the flag issue in 1952, when they tried to push us out of Scottish football unless we capitulated. Having won that battle, he waited a few years and then nailed Sir George Graham on a ticket scam in much the way that Fergus nailed Farry. Exclude Bob Kelly, who had his faults admittedly, from the calumny deservedly heaped on the Kelly trough snouts who followed him. I was thinking of the time just before the takeover i.e. the proposed Cambuslang move, his opinion that Celtic fans should invest in the lottery instead of buying shares as they had a better chance of a return from the lottery and the failure to at least try to compete with the huns. I do, however, salute Bob Kelly at the time of the tricolour issue for taking on the SFA
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|