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 (1,414,419 Views)
Celts88
Member Avatar
First-team starter
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Surprise Surprise

TRFC & SFA can do what they want and nothing ever gets done about it.

Only time anything ever happened to the SFA was when the Bunnet was around. Nowadays it's down to the Supporters to use there feet (or should that be wallets) to force the clubs to do anything, just like when Sevco were going to be parachuted back into the League.

Games a bogey - what's new!!!!!!!

Edit: Sorry, forgot to say a BIG thanks to all those that tried to pursue the JR, valiant effort, but unfortunately not the outcome we all hoped for.
Edited by Celts88, 9 Dec 2017, 10:47 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hairytoes
Member Avatar
First-team captain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Auldyin
9 Dec 2017, 02:13 AM
Looks like the Judicial Review is a no goer.

https://www.sfm.scot/fans-for-judicial-review-counsel-opinion/
Trying to change a system (or hold it accountable) from within that same system will always be hard.
It's rigged & was never going to give itself up.

Fair play for trying, do you think it's over?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Luigi
Member Avatar
Everyone's Fantasy Football first pick
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
That's a downer. Was hoping to get that shower of crooks into an independent court and make them show their drawers.
It really seems that it's all about rangers and protecting them.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
van Doesburg
Member Avatar
First-team starter
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Auldyin
9 Dec 2017, 02:13 AM
Looks like the Judicial Review is a no goer.

https://www.sfm.scot/fans-for-judicial-review-counsel-opinion/
That's really disappointing, Auldyin, and I'm guessing you'll be feeling that more than most, given all your work on this issue.

If the judicial review really is a dead-end, are there other routes we can go down?

Either to resolve this particular issue or to force change within the SFA. Or to replace the SFA altogether.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Corky Buczek
Member Avatar
Trolololo
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Auldyin
9 Dec 2017, 02:13 AM
Looks like the Judicial Review is a no goer.

https://www.sfm.scot/fans-for-judicial-review-counsel-opinion/
I'm not a lawyer.

If Celtic went to court instead of fans - and I know there would be UEFA ramifications about a member club taking on its governing authorities in a court of law - would that have made any difference. i.e. Would the Club have had a greater legal interest for it to be considered ?

If the answer is No - fair enough
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
spyda1967
First team training
[ *  *  * ]
Corky Buczek
9 Dec 2017, 12:03 PM
Auldyin
9 Dec 2017, 02:13 AM
Looks like the Judicial Review is a no goer.

https://www.sfm.scot/fans-for-judicial-review-counsel-opinion/
I'm not a lawyer.

If Celtic went to court instead of fans - and I know there would be UEFA ramifications about a member club taking on its governing authorities in a court of law - would that have made any difference. i.e. Would the Club have had a greater legal interest for it to be considered ?

If the answer is No - fair enough
did sevco not do that and once again no comeback on them
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Timdom come
Member Avatar
Older than dirt
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Celts88
9 Dec 2017, 08:15 AM
Surprise Surprise

TRFC & SFA can do what they want and nothing ever gets done about it.

Only time anything ever happened to the SFA was when the Bunnet was around. Nowadays it's down to the Supporters to use there feet (or should that be wallets) to force the clubs to do anything, just like when Sevco were going to be parachuted back into the League.

Games a bogey - what's new!!!!!!!

Edit: Sorry, forgot to say a BIG thanks to all those that tried to pursue the JR, valiant effort, but unfortunately not the outcome we all hoped for.
Seconded, a big thank you all all involved...and who knows, there may be other avenues.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Torquemada
Off treasure hunting in Holland
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Sad news. :nono:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
pads99
Member Avatar
Club Captain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Accepting the LNS farce means the Club are to blame.
Should have been robustly challenged at the time

The rule break was dual contracts not tax evasion

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joe the Baker
Member Avatar
It feels like yesterday... I wish it was tomorrow.
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I'm stunned at this news.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DICEMAN
Member Avatar
Everyone's Fantasy Football first pick
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
So Lance Armstrong FC gets away with it.

effing despicable.

Would a trip to the CAS looking into the LNS farce and the ill-gotten Uefa license be possible or is that time barred?

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tinytim81
Member Avatar
42
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
DICEMAN
9 Dec 2017, 01:26 PM
So Lance Armstrong FC gets away with it.

effing despicable.

Would a trip to the CAS looking into the LNS farce and the ill-gotten Uefa license be possible or is that time barred?

I always thought CAS was the best place to take this.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hoops For Me All The Way
Member Avatar
You want equality? Consider if that person feels Equal.
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Thanks for the valiant effort Bhoy's.

Crap. News, really crap
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DICEMAN
Member Avatar
Everyone's Fantasy Football first pick
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
tinytim81
9 Dec 2017, 01:44 PM
DICEMAN
9 Dec 2017, 01:26 PM
So Lance Armstrong FC gets away with it.

effing despicable.

Would a trip to the CAS looking into the LNS farce and the ill-gotten Uefa license be possible or is that time barred?

I always thought CAS was the best place to take this.
Agreed.

A sporting body is the only way to get sporting sanctions.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dubz
Getting on a bit
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Mon guys, chin up. We still have the compliance officer on the case.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wanyerma
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Up the club to clean the stables out, always was.

Thanks to the guys who pursued this, though.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lobey Dosser
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Dubz
9 Dec 2017, 02:41 PM
Mon guys, chin up. We still have the compliance officer on the case.
And he works for ???
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Auldyin
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
van Doesburg
9 Dec 2017, 11:52 AM
Auldyin
9 Dec 2017, 02:13 AM
Looks like the Judicial Review is a no goer.

https://www.sfm.scot/fans-for-judicial-review-counsel-opinion/
That's really disappointing, Auldyin, and I'm guessing you'll be feeling that more than most, given all your work on this issue.

If the judicial review really is a dead-end, are there other routes we can go down?

Either to resolve this particular issue or to force change within the SFA. Or to replace the SFA altogether.
To be honest I/we always had doubts about a JR based on locus. That is the right to bring a case.

Res12 does not suffer from that weakness because Celtic are a member of the SFA and Res12 is a resolution from shareholders who hold shares in an SFA member club. That is why it is still alive in spite of efforts to bury it.

Additionally Res12 has the evidence the SFA have avoided seriously looking since when first presented to them in 2014 verbally then 2015 in correspondence from Res12 lawyer until it became public in Jun 2017 at CW trial.

The Res12 lawyer has written to the Compliance Officer saying we will bring all the correspondence with SFA and UEFA to his attention because it is his and our view that any investigation worth its salt has to take that information into consideration.

Not sure if the follow up has happened but it will and complete transparency is assured because it is all on line to be published if the SFA miss anything.

The only disappointment is that the JR has left the pursuit of justice on Res12 which means more work to make it as difficult as possible for the Compliance Officer to swerve difficult questions and a dependency on Celtic that a JR would have avoided. That does not mean Celtic will not pursue but because they are an SFA member club they face constraints a JR wouldn't.

Apart from that I am led to believe Celtic have had the narrative in 2011 checked by legals before putting it to the SFA who in turn ran it past their QC who advised there was a case to answer.

So it's not done until the Comp Off reports and there has to be a limit to how long that takes because unless something unknown so far turns up then fraud was committed by the Rangers Board in 2011 and the SFA cannot be party to hiding that.

Additionally the SFA had dealings with SFA in Sept 2011 on the monitoring submission of June 2011 and the outcome of that - verbal acceptance of the submission can mean only three things.

a) The SFA lied to UEFA.
b) The SFA told UEFA the truth and they both agreed to ignore as RFC out of Europe.
c) SFA never confirmed the position with HMRC in spite of Sherriff Officers calling at Ibrox a month earlier and repeated a lie in ignorance which is culpable negligence.

The evidence strongly suggests RFC lied to obtain the licence and lied during the two monitoring stages about its status.

What is uncertain is the part SFA played thereafter from Sept 2011 to June 2016 when they finally accepted what had been put to them verbally in 2014 and in writing in 2015. It's all on record😎 and what happens next depends on SFA but the issue cannot be allowed to drag on far into the New Year without some update from SFA to pass on to shareholders.

The fat lady has still to clear her throat.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tocce 1973
First-team captain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Auldyin
9 Dec 2017, 08:25 PM
van Doesburg
9 Dec 2017, 11:52 AM
Auldyin
9 Dec 2017, 02:13 AM
Looks like the Judicial Review is a no goer.

https://www.sfm.scot/fans-for-judicial-review-counsel-opinion/
That's really disappointing, Auldyin, and I'm guessing you'll be feeling that more than most, given all your work on this issue.

If the judicial review really is a dead-end, are there other routes we can go down?

Either to resolve this particular issue or to force change within the SFA. Or to replace the SFA altogether.
To be honest I/we always had doubts about a JR based on locus. That is the right to bring a case.

Res12 does not suffer from that weakness because Celtic are a member of the SFA and Res12 is a resolution from shareholders who hold shares in an SFA member club. That is why it is still alive in spite of efforts to bury it.

Additionally Res12 has the evidence the SFA have avoided seriously looking since when first presented to them in 2014 verbally then 2015 in correspondence from Res12 lawyer until it became public in Jun 2017 at CW trial.

The Res12 lawyer has written to the Compliance Officer saying we will bring all the correspondence with SFA and UEFA to his attention because it is his and our view that any investigation worth its salt has to take that information into consideration.

Not sure if the follow up has happened but it will and complete transparency is assured because it is all on line to be published if the SFA miss anything.

The only disappointment is that the JR has left the pursuit of justice on Res12 which means more work to make it as difficult as possible for the Compliance Officer to swerve difficult questions and a dependency on Celtic that a JR would have avoided. That does not mean Celtic will not pursue but because they are an SFA member club they face constraints a JR wouldn't.

Apart from that I am led to believe Celtic have had the narrative in 2011 checked by legals before putting it to the SFA who in turn ran it past their QC who advised there was a case to answer.

So it's not done until the Comp Off reports and there has to be a limit to how long that takes because unless something unknown so far turns up then fraud was committed by the Rangers Board in 2011 and the SFA cannot be party to hiding that.

Additionally the SFA had dealings with SFA in Sept 2011 on the monitoring submission of June 2011 and the outcome of that - verbal acceptance of the submission can mean only three things.

a) The SFA lied to UEFA.
b) The SFA told UEFA the truth and they both agreed to ignore as RFC out of Europe.
c) SFA never confirmed the position with HMRC in spite of Sherriff Officers calling at Ibrox a month earlier and repeated a lie in ignorance which is culpable negligence.

The evidence strongly suggests RFC lied to obtain the licence and lied during the two monitoring stages about its status.

What is uncertain is the part SFA played thereafter from Sept 2011 to June 2016 when they finally accepted what had been put to them verbally in 2014 and in writing in 2015. It's all on record😎 and what happens next depends on SFA but the issue cannot be allowed to drag on far into the New Year without some update from SFA to pass on to shareholders.

The fat lady has still to clear her throat.
:thumbsup:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BombJack
Member Avatar
He twists, he turns, Tommy Burns...
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Auldyin
9 Dec 2017, 08:25 PM
van Doesburg
9 Dec 2017, 11:52 AM
Auldyin
9 Dec 2017, 02:13 AM
Looks like the Judicial Review is a no goer.

https://www.sfm.scot/fans-for-judicial-review-counsel-opinion/
That's really disappointing, Auldyin, and I'm guessing you'll be feeling that more than most, given all your work on this issue.

If the judicial review really is a dead-end, are there other routes we can go down?

Either to resolve this particular issue or to force change within the SFA. Or to replace the SFA altogether.
To be honest I/we always had doubts about a JR based on locus. That is the right to bring a case.

Res12 does not suffer from that weakness because Celtic are a member of the SFA and Res12 is a resolution from shareholders who hold shares in an SFA member club. That is why it is still alive in spite of efforts to bury it.

Additionally Res12 has the evidence the SFA have avoided seriously looking since when first presented to them in 2014 verbally then 2015 in correspondence from Res12 lawyer until it became public in Jun 2017 at CW trial.

The Res12 lawyer has written to the Compliance Officer saying we will bring all the correspondence with SFA and UEFA to his attention because it is his and our view that any investigation worth its salt has to take that information into consideration.

Not sure if the follow up has happened but it will and complete transparency is assured because it is all on line to be published if the SFA miss anything.

The only disappointment is that the JR has left the pursuit of justice on Res12 which means more work to make it as difficult as possible for the Compliance Officer to swerve difficult questions and a dependency on Celtic that a JR would have avoided. That does not mean Celtic will not pursue but because they are an SFA member club they face constraints a JR wouldn't.

Apart from that I am led to believe Celtic have had the narrative in 2011 checked by legals before putting it to the SFA who in turn ran it past their QC who advised there was a case to answer.

So it's not done until the Comp Off reports and there has to be a limit to how long that takes because unless something unknown so far turns up then fraud was committed by the Rangers Board in 2011 and the SFA cannot be party to hiding that.

Additionally the SFA had dealings with SFA in Sept 2011 on the monitoring submission of June 2011 and the outcome of that - verbal acceptance of the submission can mean only three things.

a) The SFA lied to UEFA.
b) The SFA told UEFA the truth and they both agreed to ignore as RFC out of Europe.
c) SFA never confirmed the position with HMRC in spite of Sherriff Officers calling at Ibrox a month earlier and repeated a lie in ignorance which is culpable negligence.

The evidence strongly suggests RFC lied to obtain the licence and lied during the two monitoring stages about its status.

What is uncertain is the part SFA played thereafter from Sept 2011 to June 2016 when they finally accepted what had been put to them verbally in 2014 and in writing in 2015. It's all on record😎 and what happens next depends on SFA but the issue cannot be allowed to drag on far into the New Year without some update from SFA to pass on to shareholders.

The fat lady has still to clear her throat.
Great stuff Auldyin. Re: Judicial review. Couldn't we just lobby the SFA etc to accept the JR? Threaten season ticket boycotts unless a JR is accepted?
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