Balance of Probabilities


As we wait (impatiently) for the First Tier Tribunal (Tax) to report its findings on the legality of how the EBT used by Rangers was operated, it might be of interest to discuss some common misunderstandings about the legal processes that will determine the outcome.

The case that will seal Rangers’ fate is governed by Scottish civil procedure.  Years of our lives wasted watching television has armed most of us with a basic understanding of criminal procedure- concepts like “innocent until proven guilty” are infused throughout popular culture. However, civil courts have very different rules.

Rangers FC have been accused by HMRC of operating an illegal tax avoidance scheme (see link for common myth about avoidance).  Following a long investigation, in early 2010 Rangers were sent a number of assessments (tax bills). Rangers appealed them.  In the several tribunal hearings that followed, evidence was presented by both sides and now it is for three judges to establish whether or not Rangers pursued an illegal scheme for more than a decade. I have heard lots of people (including Scottish journalists) make the mistake of assuming that “Rangers are innocent until proven guilty“. They are not. The standard for determining the outcome of a civil tribunal is the balance of probabilities. It is simply a question of whether it is more likely than not that Rangers’ were using the EBT as sham to pay money to players and executives on which they should have deducted income tax and national insurance.

In this case, it seems that the Rangers’ directors, and MIH staff in charge of running the scheme did not understand this distinction. Much of their behaviour appears to betray a sense that all they had to do was establish “reasonable doubt” to avoid getting in trouble. Currently, within Edinburgh’s golf club circuit, there is a widely held view that Rangers will be held accountable for some tax liability, but that the quantum will not be anything close to the huge assessments presented by HMRC. People close to Sir David Murray acknowledge that there was some sloppiness with regards record keeping in specific cases.  They seem to think that the resulting tax bill will be limited to these “one-off” errors- situations where there is no doubt that a contractual obligation was paid through the EBT.

However, the standard for determining the outcome of a tax tribunal is the balance of probabilities. If there is a significant volume of such transactions, the entire scheme can be judged to be a sham.

What determines whether there are enough illegal payments to cast the entire scheme as a sham? It will not require proof beyond a reasonable doubt or any of the other concepts burned deep in the minds of TV crime series viewers. There simply comes a point where there is so much evidence that it is clear that someone is “at it”. I expect that Rangers will be held by the judges to have been “at it”. If (or when) that happens, the real fireworks will begin.

Assuming that Rangers’ actions of the last decade are officially deemed illegal, Scottish football authorities will face the greatest moral dilemma in the history of our game. If I am correct, it is likely that the following facts will soon be firmly established:

  • Rangers provided many players with second contracts in violation of SFA rules
  • The provisions within these second contracts were in violation of the law of the land
  • Rangers fielded players whom they could not have afforded without resorting to illegality

Under these conditions, the debate about ‘helicoptering’ a newco into the SPL to replace Rangers FC would surely change. The idea of transferring the last decade of Rangers’ history to a new company would be like asking for a toxic waste dump to be moved beside your house.

I have developed a genuine empathy for the many decent (but largely silent) Rangers fans whose beloved club has been ravaged by Sir David Murray and his hand-picked lickspittles.  Much of what has been revealed on this blog in the last year serves the common good of all Scottish football fans. However, I expect that whatever common ground exists will open into a chasm over the subject of what the SFA & SPL should do about the recent history of their club.

22 May 2005- is a cherished memory for all Rangers fans. Rangers beat Hibs at Easter Road to clinch the SPL title. Neil Doncaster needs to ask: “How many members of the Rangers squad that day were, or would become, beneficiaries of the EBT scheme?” (Let me help him out- it will be a lot easier to count those who did not participate). The truth is that many of the Rangers squad would not have been anywhere near Easter Road that day without the use of the EBT scheme. If the EBT scheme is deemed to be illegal, the SFA and the SPL cannot pretend that the second contracts held by the vast majority of the Rangers’ first team players during the middle of the last decade were just a procedural transgression of no material impact. On the balance of probabilities would Rangers have been crowned Scottish Premier League champions that day without the use of the EBT scheme?

The future value of winning a championship in Scottish football is in the hands of Stewart Regan and Neil Doncaster. They will face intense pressure from those close to the old regime at Ibrox- and their friends in the media- to sweep these issues under the carpet. That would be a huge mistake.

About rangerstaxcase
I have information on Rangers' tax case, and I will use this blog to provide the details of what Rangers FC have done, why it was illegal, and what the implications for what was (updated) one of the largest football clubs in Britain.

1,501 Responses to Balance of Probabilities

  1. Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:

    Wings Over Scotland says:
    16/04/2012 at 4:33 pm

    “Under these conditions, the debate about ‘helicoptering’ a newco into the SPL to replace Rangers FC would surely change.”

    There is no possibility of a newco being helicoptered into the SPL anyway, because it directly contravenes SFA rules. I just rang the SFA myself this afternoon and they (in the shape of Claire in the Communications department) confirmed my interpretation of this:

    http://wingsland.podgamer.com/cheats-charter-controversy-ended/

    The short version is that – as laid out under Section 3, Rule 3.1.1 of the Club Licensing Manual – no club can play in the SPL without a UEFA Club Licence (issued by the SFA, not UEFA), and any club applying for a UCL must have been a member of the SFA for at least three years.

    Furthermore, under Rule 3.3.1, a Licence may NOT be transferred from any legal entity (eg Rangers FC) to any other legal entity (eg New Rangers 2012 FC).

    Therefore as it stands, it would be absolutely forbidden under SFA rules for a newco Rangers to directly enter the SPL, no matter whether the SPL invited them to or not.
    ==========================================================================
    Looks like Div 3 at best then,and no European football for at least 3 years.

    SSN report says D & P still in talks with all 3 bidders and will announce preferred bidder this week.All 3 bidders have added more conditions to their bids.

  2. v says:

    Jim Spence on Twitter trailing a breaking story “with implications for everyone in football in Scotland”

  3. Jimbo milligan says:

    Big story to break at 6.10 on sportsound.

  4. VertWolf says:

    Wings Over Scotland

    clearly you are not a journalist from the MSM – ringing the SFA to confirm the veracity of your article – whatever next?
    🙂

  5. DeRichleau says:

    @scapa at 4:43pm

    true, but its also worth bearing in mind the provisions of the following sub paragraph 3(2) (I’ve quoted the whole of 3(1) in addition for context)

    “3(1)The administrator of a company must perform his functions with the objective of—

    (a)rescuing the company as a going concern, or

    (b)achieving a better result for the company’s creditors as a whole than would be likely if the company were wound up (without first being in administration), or

    (c)realising property in order to make a distribution to one or more secured or preferential creditors.

    (2)Subject to sub-paragraph (4), the administrator of a company must perform his functions in the interests of the company’s creditors as a whole.”

    Accordingly, the hierarchy set out in 3(1) is always qualified by the need to act in the interests of the creditors as a whole, as I read it. (3(4) relates to selling property for the benefit of secured/preferred creditors, incidentally.

  6. Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:

    Big story to break at 6.10 on sportsound.
    ===========================================================================
    Trying to usurp Radio Clydes Alex Thompson appearance,perhaps.

  7. scapa says:

    DeRichleau says:

    16/04/2012 at 4:56 pm

    Cardinal, your point is well taken, I should have posted the context!

  8. Hugh McEwan says:

    Spanishcelt says:
    16/04/2012 at 4:00 pm

    ======================

    I know what you mean, and in practical terms if HMRC are well over the 25% and flatly refuse the CVA then they may well have to look at it again and simply wind the company up. Or indeed make a fresh offer.

    However, can they make a fresh offer to everyone at that time. Surely they have to wait until the period is over (or everyone has replied) before they can adjust the offer. Remember if HMRC don’t have 75% then they can’t just force it through because it suits them.

    I really do think this is all hypothetical btw.

  9. ”If you don't need to know, you don't get to hear.” says:

    Really lookin forward to the ssb under card tonight..
    The much coveted MSM-RFC(ia) title belt is on the line..
    ..Heavyweight-v-Bletherweight…
    ..be prepared for the avalanche of flying towels bein thrown in at some point..
    in the early rounds obviously…!! 🙂

    al get me gumshield…

  10. BartinMain says:

    Maybe Jim Spence’s story will have something to do with political interference in football. That’s just a hunch based on developments in the last couple of weeks re Salmond and Murdo Fraser’s idiotic meddling, as it surely would have implications for Scottish football as a whole depending on how UEFA view it, which probably would not be kindly.

  11. Jimbo milligan says:

    Therefore as it stands, it would be absolutely forbidden under SFA rules for a newco Rangers to directly enter the SPL, no matter whether the SPL invited them to or not.

    =======================

    There isn’t a rule that says membership can’t be transferred as far as i can see, just one that says it can’t be transferred outside any of the conditions specified, one of which is that the board get to judge each case on its own merits, the board having “complete discretion” over whether or not to allow the transfer.

    So it really appears like its down to regan and co to decide . Or at least thats the way i read it.

  12. andypandymonium says:

    Jim Spence on Twitter trailing a breaking story “with implications for everyone in football in Scotland”……………………..

    Jim McLean is coming out of retirement 🙂

  13. BartinMain says:

    Maybe Jim Spence’s story will have something to do with political interference in football. That’s just a hvnch based on developments in the last couple of weeks re Salmond and Murdo Fraser’s idiotic meddling, as it surely would have implications for Scottish football as a whole depending on how UEFA view it, which probably would not be kindly.

  14. Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:

    Maybe a journalist at the BBC has discovered that you can ring the SFA and ask for information.
    Nah,probably not.

    Meanwhile.over at Ibrox the bidders are questioning Duff & Duffer:
    Will we be in the SPL next season-Don’t Know.
    The SFA perhaps-Don’t know
    Will we be playing anywhere next season-Dont’know
    How’s the BTC going-Dont know
    the WTC-Ditto
    SPL/SFA investigations-What do you think
    Srathclyde Polis-Haven’t a clue
    all these court cases-well’you never know.

    Sounds good to me,here’s my £1m for exclusivity and due diligence.:-)

  15. Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:

    andypandymonium says:
    16/04/2012 at 5:07 pm

    Jim Spence on Twitter trailing a breaking story “with implications for everyone in football in Scotland”……………………..

    Jim McLean is coming out of retirement 🙂
    ===========================================================================
    No wonder the smileys didn’t work!

  16. chuckjaeger says:

    As a Celtic fan I do want to see Rangers brought to justice for all these financial irregularities. I personally would love to see them disappear but they are going to stay around in one form or another so I may as well accept it. Personally, I have thought long and hard about what is to be considered a ‘fair’ punishment. i.e. As much as I would hate (I really mean HATE) it I thought about what would be reasonable if we were talking about Celtic rather than Rangers in these circumstances.

    I thought this would be perfectly reasonable in these circumstances:

    1) Rangers Newco to start in the lowest league and work its way up. For a Rangers fan this is not a bad option in my opinion. You get to wipe the slate clean, earn your way legitimately up (surely get promoted every season), ask the ‘faithful’ to sell out Ibrox over the next few years and due to the lower wage bill you could save up a war chest for when you’re back in the SPL. It would also help that smaller clubs would get a nice bonus from sellout crowds when Rangers visit on their away travels. Nobody could accuse them of not being punished or not earning their credibility back as far as other SPL clubs are concerned. I think this is a great deterrent for other clubs not to go into liquidations as well. Teams in the SPL that don’t have such great support could really struggle to get back up to the top tier (in any reasonable period of time) which is a massive incentive to manager your finances correctly.

    2) If it has been found that players were issued double contracts not registered with the SPL (however far that goes back) then any games these players played in should have a default 3-0 win to the opposition. Re-calculate the league table and see how it shakes out at each season end (probably not well for RFC in the last ten years). These results and outcomes now stand in the history books, perhaps with an asterisk attached.

    3) Any cup wins for Rangers are simply changed to ‘void’ for the season with no club claiming ownership that year. Again an asterisk would denote the reason why which is a pretty powerful peace of shaming on RFC in the books for the rest of time.

    A few other points:

    Paul Murray – How can someone who sat on the board while this was all going on be considered a fit and proper person by the SPL? Also, why on earth as a Rangers fan would you want this guy back? For me it would all be about wiping the slate clean and I wouldn’t want anyone from the previous administration tainting my new squeaky clean club. This is one area where the SPL could easily and legitimately step in and by not doing so right now makes them look like complete hypocrites. I would also say it damages the legitimacy of the SPL as a governing body and a company looking for advertising, sponsorship and TV revenue.

    Newco – A lot has been said about the fact that a company is being liquidated and not the club. i.e. The parent company gets dissolved and the club as one of its ‘assets’ simply gets sold to a new owner enabling a degree of continuity. Almost a kind of ship of Theseus paradox here. I am torn between this one as I think a newco may have a legitimate right to claim the former trophies (not the financial doping ones mentioned above).

    As a Celtic fan I actually have no beef with this and it seems a bit harsh to say you are now new and different so everything before that doesn’t count. If they look like Rangers, smell like Rangers and taste like Rangers they’re Rangers. Their support would continue to count past victories as well so what’s the point?

    For me, if this was the outcome of all of this I would be satisfied that Rangers were punished correctly and fairly and I actually think the SPL and Scottish FA would garner some much needed credibility.

  17. metanight says:

    Sky Sports News are saying D&P’s will announce a preferred bidder later this week.

  18. Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:

    Sky Sports News are saying D&P’s will announce a preferred bidder later this week.
    ==========================================================================
    I think a wee bit of desperation may be creeping in.the admin report(have D & D apologised for the £4.3m oversight)showed under a million left.they’re billing around 200k a week and it won’t be long till pay day.unless they get cash from somewhere,they cannot meet the wage bill,can they?.

  19. “There isn’t a rule that says membership can’t be transferred as far as i can see, just one that says it can’t be transferred outside any of the conditions specified”

    No, 3.3.1 is unequivocal: “A Licence cannot be transferred from one legal entity to another.” That’s the entire rule. No qualifications, no get-outs.

  20. Spencey’s big scoop? Jabba and Chico to be named as preferred bidders for RFC(IA) by Duff and Dufferer tomorrow!!

  21. Jimbo milligan says:
    16/04/2012 at 5:07 pm

    There isn’t a rule that says membership can’t be transferred as far as i can see, just one that says it can’t be transferred outside any of the conditions specified, one of which is that the board get to judge each case on its own merits, the board having “complete discretion” over whether or not to allow the transfer.

    So it really appears like its down to regan and co to decide . Or at least thats the way i read it.

    ===========================================================================

    Jimbo, you’re right and you’re wrong. There’s nothing preventing them transferring the shareholding of Rangers in the SPL but that’s not the point WingsOverScotland is making.

    You can transfer the shareholding in that company but you can’t transfer the UEFA license. The SFA club licensing manual clearly states that a license can’t be transferred from one legal entity to another. A new company is a new legal entity, no getting around it.

    Consider UEFA’s recent statement to the effect that they trusted the SFA to deal with this under the club licensing provisions.

    3.1.1 is, obviously, contained within section 3 of the SFA club licensing manual. The manual itself states that sections 1 to 4 are subject to review by UEFA and the same applies if those sections are amended. Those sections reflect UEFA’s own club licensing provisions in any case.

    All the focus is on the SPL rules but the SFA are the governing body here and there’s no getting around that. They hold the cards, and if they don’t play them according to the rules then UEFA will do it for them. As to why they haven’t made a public statement yet, why would they? It would be inappropriate to reply to speculation.

    The only remaining vehicle is to buy another club who have already have a license – either a UEFA license i.e. an SPL club, or a license that can be upgraded. In the case of the latter, the SPL could then vote them in under existing rules.

  22. TheBlackKnight TBK says:

    v on 16/04/2012 at 4:49 pm said:
     0 0 Rate This
    Jim Spence on Twitter trailing a breaking story “with implications for everyone in football in Scotland”
    •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

    Is it Taxi Drivers to stop spreading rumours?

  23. Jimbo milligan says:

    It will be the referees again … Its becoming “tiresome”.

  24. Johnbhoy says:

    Wings Over Scotland says:
    16/04/2012 at 5:24 pm
    “There isn’t a rule that says membership can’t be transferred as far as i can see, just one that says it can’t be transferred outside any of the conditions specified”
    –––––––
    No, 3.3.1 is unequivocal: “A Licence cannot be transferred from one legal entity to another.” That’s the entire rule. No qualifications, no get-outs.
    ––––––––
    And that echoes UEFA’s rules. No wiggle room for the SFA there.
    The fact that UEFA stated they had full confidence in the SFA to uphold the letter “and spirit” of the Financial Fair Play regulations is fairly ominous for any hopes of a Newco getting into the SPL.
    All SPL clubs need a UEFA Club Licence (administered by the SFA). It refers only to the top league in Scotland.
    The rules are less stringent for SFL clubs.

    Incidentally, Whyte is playing with fire by giving the “two fingers” to the SFA over its disciplinary hearing.
    He remains the owner, main shareholder and practically the only director left of the club (in administration).
    At this stage, the SFA may have no option but to declare that Rangers are not a Fit And Proper Club, given their complete absence of acceptable corporate governance.
    Suspension? Denial of Club Licence? What else can be done to a club that, at boardroom level, has simply ceased to acknowledge that any rules exist, far less follow them?

  25. Chazz says:

    Jim Spence on Twitter trailing a breaking story “with implications for everyone in football in Scotland”…………………….

    If it was that important then they would have said it on news drive.

  26. Goosy says:

    andypandymonium says:
    16/04/2012 at 5:07 pm

    Jim Spence on Twitter trailing a breaking story “with implications for everyone in football in Scotland”……………………

    Wonder if a scottish institution is about to be privatised ?

  27. Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:

    here’s a pre-curser to tonights AT interview:

  28. Hoopy 7 says:

    BRTH
    Great.
    David Holmes was chair of Rangers at time.
    Malborough was in America.
    I had dealings – bought some property from them.
    I know things but cannot say publicly.
    The Open Cast Mines were Gillespie family’s

  29. Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:

    From KDS;

    oisin71 ‏ @oisin71 Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
    CORRECTION: Hearing that HMRC have WON their tax case against MIH. Rangers* will be subject to a £39m tax bill. Payable immediately.

    Obviously I can’t confirm.

  30. WOTTPI says:

    Whyte not turning up at the SFA must surely put another nail in the coffin.
    What is Regan waiting for?
    Duff and Duffer are admitting they are sitting around waiting on something to happen so why not get them to earn their fees by getting out the paperwork of the EBT’s and player registration. While Regan is in there he can whisper in their ear that they are screwed for a CVA and lay down the law for getting the a licence for a newco and that records will be altered to tell the world that the club were run by a bunch of chancers.

  31. scapa says:

    WOTTPI says:

    16/04/2012 at 6:01 pm

    They still have to hold the hearg, no point in giving our hero any grounds for complaint!

  32. scapa says:

    jim spence‏@bbcjimspence

    The SFA is considering setting up a Scottish national league to replace the SPL and the SFL. full story on Sportsound 810 mw 6.10pm

  33. Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:

    so that’s it,the SFA are considering setting up their own league.Wonder who they’ll invite?.

  34. There's Only One Willie Miller says:

    A new SFA league, no doubt with Rangers newco in it

  35. Johnbhoy says:

    The old league rules were, how can I put it . . .
    Inconvenient.

    This stinks like two-week-old herring.

  36. duggie73 says:

    Deserving of closer attention than it appears to be receiving…

    Wings Over Scotland says:
    16/04/2012 at 4:33 pm
    “Under these conditions, the debate about ‘helicoptering’ a newco into the SPL to replace Rangers FC would surely change.”

    There is no possibility of a newco being helicoptered into the SPL anyway, because it directly contravenes SFA rules. I just rang the SFA myself this afternoon and they (in the shape of Claire in the Communications department) confirmed my interpretation of this:

    http://wingsland.podgamer.com/cheats-charter-controversy-ended/

    The short version is that – as laid out under Section 3, Rule 3.1.1 of the Club Licensing Manual – no club can play in the SPL without a UEFA Club Licence (issued by the SFA, not UEFA), and any club applying for a UCL must have been a member of the SFA for at least three years.

    Furthermore, under Rule 3.3.1, a Licence may NOT be transferred from any legal entity (eg Rangers FC) to any other legal entity (eg New Rangers 2012 FC).

    Therefore as it stands, it would be absolutely forbidden under SFA rules for a newco Rangers to directly enter the SPL, no matter whether the SPL invited them to or not.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    The SPL rules are not the only game in town a newco has to win in order to be set up, as outlined above by WingsoverScotland and on KDS by celticFCblog in the “Articles of Association” part, which has dropped down to page 2…

    ++++++++++++++++++
    ceticfcblog says…
    Are SPL rules not trumped by the SFA’s Club Licensing regulations?
    The key rule (copied verbatim from UEFA’s Financial Fair Play rules) states:
    “A Licence cannot be transferred from one legal entity to another.”
    All SPL clubs need an SFA Club Licence.
    The SPL and SFA will face UEFA sanctions if they ignore the FFP rules and, indeed, the “spirit” of the rules.

    Just to clarify, the SFA Club Licensing Manual can be found here.

    3.2 Legal Link between Licence Applicant and Licensor
    National Club Licensing was approved by the Scottish FA membership at the Scottish FA EGM in May 2002.
    All SPL and SFL clubs, as members of the Scottish FA, are subject to National Club Licensing and are bound by its requirements.

    3.3 Licence
    3.3.1 Licence Awards for Scottish Premier League Clubs (SPL)
    A Licence cannot be transferred from one legal entity to another.

    Clear as day.

  37. Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:

    I wouldn’t think this could be done by start of next season,therefore RFC probably won’t be playing next season.

  38. scapa says:

    Johnbhoy says:

    16/04/2012 at 6:14 pm

    personally, giving the SFA some leeway, there are two to many footballing bodies in my view, it makes sense for everything to come under a suitably professionalised SFA!

  39. Moi says:

    Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
    16/04/2012 at 2:37 pm
    —————————–

    Apart from RTCs posts that was my ‘JFK moment’ so far in this (RFC (IA) soap which has more layers than a bloody onion, incredibly informative, thank you!

    This blog really is the only show in town that you can believe.

    C’mon the rest of you cone heads, we are all hungry for more. 😉

  40. Moi says:

    Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
    16/04/2012 at 2:37 pm
    —————————–

    Apart from RTCs posts that was my ‘JFK moment’ so far in this (RFC (IA) soap which has more layers than a bloody onion, incredibly informative, thank you!

    This blog really is the only show in town that you can believe.

    C’mon the rest of you cone heads, we are all hvngry for more.

  41. TheBlackKnight TBK says:

    Apologies if already posted. Picked up from RTC twitter. (auldheid, think you said as much)

    http://wingsland.podgamer.com/cheats-charter-controversy-ended/

    “Cheat’s Charter” controversy ended
    Posted on April 13, 2012 by RevStu
    From the Scottish Football Association rules on Club Licensing (specifically  Part 3, Section 03 – The Club as Licence Applicant and the UEFA Licence). Emphasis ours.
    “3.1.1 The Licence Applicant may only be a football club, that is the legal entity fully responsible for the football team participating in national and international competitions and which is the legal entity member of the Scottish Football Association (Full or Associate Member). The licence applicant is responsible for the fulfillment of the club licensing criteria. This membership must have been in place at the start of the licence season for a minimum period of three consecutive years.

    […]

    3.3.1 UEFA Licence Awards for Scottish Premier League Clubs (SPL)
    A Licence cannot be transferred from one legal entity to another.”
    NB: “UEFA Licence” does not denote a licence to compete in UEFA competitions, which are governed by an entirely different set of criteria. As the SFA website explains:
    “National Club Licensing applies to Scottish FA member clubs and UEFA Club Licensing applies to Scottish Premier League clubs.”

    In other words, to play in the SPL you must have a UEFA Club Licence, regardless of whether you actually compete in UEFA competitions or not. (SFL clubs, who in normal circumstances wouldn’t be expected to qualify for European tournaments, are dealt with separately via an “extraordinary procedure” in the event that they do.)
    So, should Rangers FC be subject to liquidation and then reborn as a “newco”, the new company would NOT be eligible for the licence required to play in the SPL, for at least three years. Furthermore, it is plainly and explicitly forbidden under SFA rules for such a licence to be transferred from one legal entity (Rangers FC) to another (New Rangers FC 2012). Well, that’s that all sorted out, then. As you were.

  42. Private Land says:

    Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:

    16/04/2012 at 4:47 pm

    Looks like Div 3 at best then,and no European football for at least 3 years.
    ____________________________________________________________________________

    You need a licence to play in the SFL as well.

  43. timtim says:

    Can Whyte plead guilty but with diminished responsibility on psychiatric grounds

  44. TheBlackKnight TBK says:

    Sorry Duggie(beat me to it), great minds eh 😉

  45. Johnbhoy says:

    Reading Jim Spence’s blog, it seems clear the idea for the new league has come from Yorkston, Johnston and their Gang of Ten.
    The relevant quote is along the lines of: “If two or three don’t want to join, then so be it.”
    By that, this anonymous spokesman means Celtic.
    So with current SPL/SFA rules leaving Rangers on the outside looking in, the plan from the leaders of the Gang of Ten is to start a new league, with new rules, invite Rangers in, and give Celtic an offer they will hopefully refuse.
    It’s so cynical, shameless and corrupt that it is sickening.
    There truly is a putrid cancer at the heart of Scottish football.

  46. Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:

    Private Land says:
    16/04/2012 at 6:32 pm

    Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:

    16/04/2012 at 4:47 pm

    Looks like Div 3 at best then,and no European football for at least 3 years.
    ____________________________________________________________________________

    You need a licence to play in the SFL as well.
    ==========================================================================
    Looks like the SFA may have found a way round this,unless the SFA apply their own rules for entry to this new league(3 years accounts,etc).Not holding my breath,though.

  47. easyJambo says:

    Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says: 16/04/2012 at 2:37 pm

    Cracking post BRTH. Right up there with one of the best posted since the blog started.

    I can empathise with your views on Gavin Masterton CBE as being the common link in the financial difficulties across Scottish football. I worked for BoS from 1975 until 2000 then HBOS from 2003-2008. It was the same person who changed BoS from being a low risk, prudent financial institution under the control of Sir Bruce Pattullo into a risk taking, profit seeking, bonus culture organisation the epitomises all that is wrong with both the banking system and the Scottish football economy.

  48. Torrevieja Johnbhoy says:

    Is it just a case of RFC lose the BTC,liquidated.Newco invited penalty free into new league.Can’t see it up and running for next season,though.Time for Celtic to enter the fray,I think.

  49. Barcabhoy says:

    Johnbhoy says:
    16/04/2012 at 6:34 pm
    0 0 Rate This
    Reading Jim Spence’s blog, it seems clear the idea for the new league has come from Yorkston, Johnston and their Gang of Ten.
    The relevant quote is along the lines of: “If two or three don’t want to join, then so be it.”
    By that, this anonymous spokesman means Celtic.
    So with current SPL/SFA rules leaving Rangers on the outside looking in, the plan from the leaders of the Gang of Ten is to start a new league, with new rules, invite Rangers in, and give Celtic an offer they will hopefully refuse.
    It’s so cynical, shameless and corrupt that it is sickening.
    There truly is a putrid cancer at the heart of Scottish football.

    ================

    Johnbhoy,

    I could see Yorkston happily contriving a situation where Celtic are made to sit at the back of the bus, made to feel grateful for a seat at all. His barely concealed contempt and bias are all to obvious. Johnston wants to appear statesmanlike and reasonable, his actions belie his words.

    I however have a problem believing that many of the others would conspire to force Celtic out in order to allow Rangers in.

  50. Mark says:

    Celtic should say “no thanks”

%d bloggers like this: